Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

PRIVATE BILLS [Lords] (Standing Orders not previously inquired into complied with),

Mr. SPEAKER laid upon the Table Report from one of the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills, That, in the case of the following Bills, originating in the Lords, and referred on the First Reading thereof, the Standing Orders not previously inquired into, which are applicable thereto, have been complied with, namely:

Colonial Bank Bill [Lords].

Bethlem Hospital Bill [Lords],

Bills to be read a Second time.

Royal Exchange Assurance Bill [Lords],

As amended, considered; to be road the Third time.

Southern Railway Bill [Lords],

As amended, to be considered Tomorrow.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

HOME, IMPERIAL, AND FOREIGN MARKETS.

Commander BELLAIRS: 1.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he can give an approximate estimate of the relative value of the home, Imperial and foreign markets in the trade of the country?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Philip Cunliffe-Lister): As I pointed out on Monday week, questions such as that raised by my hon. and gallant Friend cannot be answered with any
certainty until the results of the Census of Production, now proceeding, are available. In 1907, when the first Census was taken, the values of the goods produced in this country (from native or imported material) which were disposed of in the home market, in foreign markets and in the markets of the British Empire were, approximately, in the proportions of 100, 31 and 15. In the year 1924, the proportions of the foreign markets to those of the British Empire were approximately as 31 to 19, exports to the Irish Free State being omitted from the latter figure in order to render it comparable with that given for 1907. The corresponding figure for the home markets cannot be given, as pointed out previously.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: Do these statistics include anything for services, or do they relate solely to goods?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: This question relates entirely to goods, and the answer relates solely to goods.

IRON AND STEEL MANUFACTIRES.

Commander BELLAIRS: 2.
asked the President of the Board 01 Trade what was the increase or decrease in the total imports of iron and steel manufactures, including machinery, from the western European States of Germany, Belgium, Holland, and France in the last available six months as compared with the first six months of 1922: and what was the increase or decrease in the same category of our exports to those States?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: As the answer contains a number of figures, I will, with the hon. and gallant Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The following statement shows the weight of iron and snow and manufactures thereof (other than of iron and ferroalloys) and of machinery imported into and exported from "he United Kingdom, from and to Germany, France, Belgium and the Netherlands during the six months ended 31st May, 1925, compared with the average corresponding imports and exports in each half of 1922. Separate figures for the first half of 1922 are not available.

—
(a)Average for each half of 1922.
(b)1st December 1924, to 31st May,1925.
(b)as a percentage of (a)


Imports from the specified countries:
Tons.
Tons.



Iron and Steel and manufactures thereof (except Pig iron and Ferro-alloys).
285,510
1,061,993
372


Machinery
9,829
16,994
173


Exports to the specified countries:





Iron and Steel and manufactures thereof (except Pig iron and Ferro-alloys).
111,662
92,183
83


Machinery
30,784
32,812
107

FILM INDUSTRY.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: 5.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has further considered the position of the British cinematograph film producing industry; whether he has now received any suggestion from the industry for help or assistance from the Government; and, if so, what form does the suggestion or suggestions take?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: Various tentative suggestions, of the kind which have appeared in the public Press, have been made to the Board of Trade by various sections of the film industry, and by individuals; but no proposals have yet been made by the industry collectively or as commanding general support.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: Has the right hon. Gentleman considered calling a conference of those interested in the industry, or taking other steps to see what can be done?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: I have been in close touch with them for some months now, and I am receiving a deputation from the industry next week.

FOREIGN-MADE GOODS (MARKING).

Sir ROBERT GOWER: 6.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, having regard to the necessity for encouraging the sale of British-made goods in this country, he will consider the desirability of introducing legislation requiring that all advertisements of goods manufactured or produced outside the Empire shall expressly and conspicuously state that such goods are foreign made, and that no such goods shall be exposed or exhibited for sale without being prominently labelled foreign made?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: The question of the compulsory indication of the country of origin of imported goods has been under the consideration of the various trade interests concerned, who have, however, up to the present been unable to agree as to the policy to be pursued. While it would be impossible to pass legislation this Session, I agree with my hon. Friend that the question deserves, and it is receiving, careful consideration.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER: Would it not be preferable to arrange a scheme for the identification of Empire produce?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: That matter is already engaging the attention of the Imperial Economic Committee.

EXPORT TRADE (INSURANCE AGAINST BAD DEBTS.

Major-General Sir FREDERICK SYKES: 68.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Overseas Trade Department what action is being taken about insurance against bad debts in export trade; whether he proposes to appoint a Committee to examine the question; and, if so, can he state the names of the Members of the Committee?

Mr. A. M. SAMUEL (Secretary, Overseas Trade Department): The Department of Overseas Trade has for some time past been studying the question of insurance against bad debts in export trade. The time has now arrived when an expert Committee should be constituted to examine the question in close detail. I am glad to announce that I have formed a Committee, of the following gentlemen, under the chairmanship of Colonel the Hon. Sidney Peel:
Colonel the Hon. Sidney Peel, D.S.O. (Chairman), Chairman of the
National Discount Company, Limited, Chairman of the London Committee of the National Bank of Egypt.
J. Caulcutt, Esquire, General Manager of Barclays Bank.
Sir William H. Clark, K.C.S.I., C.M.G., Comptroller-General of the Department of Overseas Trade.
A. C. Gladstone, Esquire, Director of the Bank of England, etc., etc.
The Hon. Sir William Goschen, K.B.E., of Messrs Goschens & Cunlifie, Chairman of the Sun Insurance Office.
Joseph Powell, Esquire, General Manager of the Commercial Union Assurance Company.
Eustace R. Pulbrook, Esquire, Deputy-Chairman of Lloyd's.
Gilbert C. Vyle, Esquire, Deputy-President of the Association of British Chambers of Commerce.
Colonel the Hon. F. V. Willey, C.M.G., C.B.E., M.V.O., President of the Federation of British Industries.

Mr. LUNN: I would like to ask if the hon. Gentleman would consider giving a rather wider range of names than those he has mentioned, and possibly finding some gentleman who is not agreed about the scheme which he has been propounding?

Mr. SAMUEL: I do not think for a moment that those gentlemen are agreed.

Country whence consigned.
Year 1924.
Jan.-June,1925.


Quantity Imported.
Value.
Quantity Imported.
Value.







Lbs.
£
Lbs.
£


Germany
…
…
…
…
435,717
32,142
258,695
24,566


Netherlands
…
…
…
…
782,396
106,321
706,528
75,739


Belgium
…
…
…
…
5,566,468
536,292
2,979,406
285,015


France
…
…
…
…
55,674
9,192
40,651
5,961


Czechoslovakia
…
…
…
…
321,231
44,648
852,097
117,752


British India
…
…
…
…
709,074
54,262


Other Countries
…
…
…
…
122,144
19,822


Total Imports
…
…
7,992,704
802,679
4,837,377
509,033


Figures distinguishing single and double yarns are not available.

As regards the last part of the question, I am afraid I can only say that the great bulk of these imports consisted

This work requires skilled technical knowledge, and it is difficult to get men to do that kind of work.

Mr. LUNN: This is a serious matter, and I think the hon. Gentleman ought to consider extending his Committee in the way I have suggested.

Mr. SAMUEL: This is a matter of great importance, and I should be glad if the hon. Gentleman will give me the name of any gentleman whom he thinks is capable of dealing with this highly technical matter.

COTTON YARN (IMPORTS).

Mr. WIGGINS: 8.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the weight and value of both single and doubled cotton yarn imported into this country during the year 1924 and during the six months ending 30th June, 1925, giving the country of origin and, if possible, saying what branch of trade in this country uses this imported yarn?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE- LISTER: As the answer involves a number of figures, perhaps the hon. Member will allow me to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The following statement shows the quantities and values of all descriptions of cotton yarn imported into Great Britain and Northern Ireland during the periods specified, distinguishing the principal sources of supply, so far as the particulars are available.

of grey, unbleached yarns of the coarser kind up to No. 40 count.

Oral Answers to Questions — SAFEGUARDING OF INDUSTRIES.

INQUIRIES.

Colonel GRETTON: 9.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if any committees are sitting at the Board of Trade at the present time inquiring into industries which have applied to be safeguarded?

Mr. MacKENZIE LIVINQSTONE: 10.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what inquiries are now proceeding under the terms of the White Paper (Safeguarding of Industries); and whether he anticipates receiving any of the Reports before the Recess?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: The Re-ports of the Committees on Gloves and Superphosphates have now been received, and that of the Committee on Gas Mantles is expected shortly. No other Committees are sitting.

Colonel GRETTON: Are the Reports made by the Committees considered confidential to the Government and is publication withheld until after the Government have come to a decision as to whether an application will be granted or otherwise?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LFSTER: That matter is now receiving attention.

Mr. DIXEY: May we know if the Report of the Civil Research Committee on the iron and steel trade is likely to be available soon?

Mr. SPEAKER: That question does not arise.

Mr. LIVINGSTONE: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether under the terms of the White Paper (Safeguarding of Industries) applicants are entitled to the grant of an inquiry, provided that the conditions set out in the said Paper are fulfilled: and whether the Board of Trade may grant or refuse an inquiry at its discretion?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: ; I have been asked to reply. As the hon. Member is aware, the White Paper is not a Statute, and there is, therefore, no question of any legal rights there under. The White Paper, however, lays down the general lines on which the Government deal with applications.

FABRIC GLOVES.

Mr. BASIL PETO: 3 and 4.
asked the President of the Board of Trade (1) the date of the application by the fabric glove industry for inclusion under the Safeguarding of Industries Act which was repealed last year, and the date when the second Committee, appointed to consider the question, reported;
(2) the date when the Committee appointed to inquire into the question of the inclusion of the glove industry under the present safeguarding proposals of the Government was appointed; and whether he can give any indication as to the date when they may be expected to report?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE-LISTER: It is often difficult to give the precise date of an application, since there is often a good deal of correspondence between applicants and the Board of Trade before the complete application is formally made, but the application by the fabric glove industry under Part II of the Safeguarding of Industries Act, 1921, was referred to a Committee on the 23rd November, 1921; the second Report of the Committee on that application was made on the 25th July, 1922. The application under the present procedure was referred to a Committee on the 25th April, 1926, and the Committee to which it was referred reported on the 6th July.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH ARMY.

SCOTTISH REGIMENTS (NATIONAL FLAG).

Mr. J. B. COUPER: 12.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the fact that English colour-bearing regiments have the privilege of carrying as their second or battalion colour their national flag of St. George, whereas Scottish regiments are precluded from carrying their national banner of St. Andrew, will he be prepared to advise the revival of the privilege in favour of Scottish regiments?

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Sir Laming Worthington-Evans): I am advised that this suggestion, which has been many times considered, involves the whole principle on which the regimental colours of the Army have been modelled since the Act of Union. I am therefore not in favour of any change. I may add
that the Cross of St. George is the regimental colour only of regiments with scarlet or white facings, and not of all English colour-bearing regiments.

Brigadier-General CHARTERIS: Is not the flag of Scotland, in fact, the Royal Standard of Scotland?

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: I am not going to venture into this matter further than to answer the specific question put to me. I see the subject is full of snags.

BOLSHEVIST PROPAGANDA.

Brigadier-General MAKINS: 14.
asked the Secretary of State for War if he can make any statement as to the recent Bolshevist propaganda at Aldershot, and whether any traces of it have been observed at other military centres?

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: Investigations are being made into the origin of the Bolshevist propaganda at Aldershot, and at one other military centre where a similar case has occurred. I would prefer not to make any statement on the subject at the present time.

LULWORTH COVE

Sir CHARLES OMAN: 15.
asked he Secretary of State for War at what date Lulworth Cove is to be evacuated by the tank gunnery school in pursuance of the legal decision of 1924?

Sir L. WORTHINGTON EVANS: I would refer the hon. Member to my reply on the 15th June to the hon. and gallant Member for Everton (Colonel Woodcock). The military authorities are now in occupation of the land by arrangement with the owners, pending the provision of alternative accommodation.

ACCOUNTANCY (COST).

Mr. HOMAN: 16.
asked the Secretary of State for War the total expenditure upon Army accountancy for the years 1922, 1923 and 1924, including Royal Army Pay Corps, Corps of Military Accountants, civilian employers and all overhead charges; and what percentage these sums represent of the total expenditure of his Department?

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: The amount included in Estimates for the Corps in question, including civilian
employés and overhead charges (other than pensions) has been



£


1922–23 
963,546


1923–24
780,748


1924–25
699,957


being respectively 1.54, 1.50 and 1.56 per cent, of the total estimated expenditure of the War Department.

BROUGHTY FERRY CASTLE (FOOTPATH).

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: 19.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is yet able to report agreement on the proposed footpath through the grounds of Broughty Ferry Castle, according to plan submitted by the city engineer?

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: The answer is in the negative. The War Office is awaiting a report from the General Officer Commanding-in-Chief, Scottish Command, by whom the proposal must be examined in the first instance.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: Did not the right hon. Gentleman assure the Corporation of Dundee that this was a very slight affair and would be easily carried through; and may we not therefore expect more rapid progress in the arrangements for a settlement?

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: I have no objection to the hon. Member expecting. I will try to make the progress as rapid as I can.

ROYAL TOURSAMENT.

Captain GARRO-JONES: 20.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether serving sailors, soldiers, or airmen take part in the Royal Tournament: whether the Royal Tournament has any other official sanction; whether any balance-sheet is issued to persons other than members of the Committee; whether any serving officers serve on the Committee: and whether he can see his way to decline official connection with the Royal Tournament until a properly audited balance-sheet is published?

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: The answers to the first. second and fourth parts of the question are in the affirmative, and to the third and last parts in the negative.

SPECIAL CAMPAIGN PENSIONERS.

Major HORE-BELISHA: 11.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he
is aware that special campaign pensioners, owing to the fact that they are excluded from the benefits of the Pensions (Increase) Acts, are in a worse position than pre-War pensioners, who get the benefit of the Acts; and whether, in these circumstances, he can recommend the Government to consider amending the pre-War Pensions Act, so as to allow the small pensions in question to be augmented, or take other steps to improve the position of these special campaign pensionrs?

Sir L. WORTH INGTON-EVANS: Pre-War special campaign pensioners are entitled to the benefits of the Pensions (Increase) Warrants in common with other pre-War pensioners. The bulk of the special campaign pensions now in payment, however, are not pre-War pensions, but are on an increased post-War scale, and are, therefore, outside the scope of the Increase Warrants.

Oral Answers to Questions — CHINA.

SHANGHAI VOLUNTEER FORCE (ARMS).

Mr. MACKINDER: 13.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether his Department has received during the past six months any application for the supply of arms to the Shanghai volunteer force; and, if so, whether the application was complied with?

Sir L. WORTHINGTON-EVANS: The answer to both parts of the question is in the affirmative.

BRITISH MAILS (SIBERIAN ROUTE).

Colonel ENGLAND: 60.
asked the Postmaster-General whether he has received reports from commercial houses of standing in China to the effect that their mails have been tampered with in passing through Soviet Russia; and whether he is satisfied that the public are safe in using this means of communication?

Mr. THURTLE: On a point of Order, Sir. Before this question is answered, may I ask for your ruling as to whether it is in order, in view of the fact that it contains an innuendo against a friendly Power?

Mr. SPEAKER: I do not think it does, necessarily. I have heard of mails being tampered with in many countries in the world.

The ASSISTANT POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Viscount Wolmer): I have not received any reports which would indicate that the mails for China sent by the Siberian route are being tampered with in transit; and I have no grounds for advising that this route should not be used.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

HOUSING.

Mr. JOHNSTON: 21.
asked the Secretary for Scotland what are the latest figures available showing the comparative costs of building houses of 853 feet square in brick, Weir type and Atholl type, respectively?

The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): I regret that I am not at present in a position to give the information desired. The numbers of houses actually erected of the Weir type or Atholl type are not so far sufficient to give an average cost on a comparable basis to that of brick construction.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Has the right hon. Gentleman had his attention drawn to the detailed analysis of these costs appearing in the "Architects' Journal" and the "Building and Monumental Trade Workers' Journal"?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Ho, Sir; but I will inform myself.

Mr. JOHNSTON: 22.
asked the Secretary for Scotland how many houses are being built under State-aided schemes in Scotland; and how many of these houses are steel houses of the Weir type?

Sir J. GILMOUR: The latest date for which figures in regard to building progress in Scotland are available is 31st May, 1925. At that date 11,186 houses were in coures of construction under the various State-assisted schemes. Of these 11,186 houses, 7 were steel houses of the Weir type. A further number of steel houses have been completed, and others are on order.

Mr. JOHNSTON: 23.
asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the fact that he has gently had an interview at his request with representatives of the housing committees of the leading municipal authorities in Scotland, during which he sought to exercise pressure upon them against their desires and judgment
to erect Weir steel houses in their areas, he can give an assurance that he will not refuse to authorise housing schemes which do not contain a percentage of steel houses?

Commander FANSHAWE: On a point of Order. Is it in order for an hon. Member of this House to bring a charge against, or impute any improper action to another hon. Member at Question time, as is done in this particular question, in lines 3 and 4?

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. and gallant Member's point escapes me. I cannot see anything improper in the question.

Mr. WESTWOOD: The hon. and gallant Member has very long vision. That is why he can see what is not there.

Sir J. GILMOUR: I have been, and still am, disquieted by the very slow progress of actual building in the State-assisted housing schemes in Scotland, and the constant tendency towards higher costs. The interview referred to was held with the object of investigating the reasons for this slow progress, and also any difficulties which were standing in the way of allowing a larger number of men to find employment in meeting the urgent demand for houses. The situation will be further reviewed in a conference with all the larger local authorities, which I am holding on Monday next (20th instant), but I must decline to pledge myself in advance to refrain from considering any possible steps towards the acceleration of the building programme concerning which I receive such constant representations from the people of Scotland.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Can the right hon. Gentleman give the House an assurance that, before he imposes any policy, such as is suggested in this question, of compelling local authorities in Scotland to put 20 per cent. of Weir steel houses into the housing schemes, he will give the House an opportunity of discussing that policy?

Brigadier-General CHARTERIS: Is it not the case that in Scotland housing has to a certain extent been retarded by the fact that under existing legislation members of county councils are prohibited from taking advantage of the subsidy when they desire to build houses on their own estates or otherwise?

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: Is it not the case that the Department is holding up some of the schemes put forward by the Dundee Corporation on the score of economy?

Sir J. GILMOUR: In reference to the last question, I am not aware of that being the fact, and I do not think it is the case. With regard to what my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Dumfries (Brigadier-General Charteris) says, that is a matter that I am afraid is not relevant to this question. With regard to the question of the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston), I am entering into a conference with all the larger local authorities, and I cannot at this period say that my hands will be tied in any respect whatever with regard to the erection of Weir houses.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER: Does the right hon. Gentleman think he has any authority at all from this House to compel local authorities to erect steel houses?

Sir J. GILMOUR: That may be a matter of opinion, but I am sure I have power if I think it is going to produce a greater acceleration of building in Scotland.

Mr. JOHNSTON: Arising out of the original answer, in view of the fact that these particular houses cost more, that the wages paid are less, and that it will inevitably lead, as he knows, to a building trade strike and, consequently, to a stoppage of housing altogether, and considering the great importance of the question, will he not give this House an opportunity of discussing an important departure in policy of this kind?

Sir J. GILMOUR: There is no doubt that every opportunity of criticising my action will be taken on the Vote for the Scottish Office. I am entering into a conference with the larger local authorities, and I am only anxious to carry them with the Government in any steps that they may think desirable.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to give notice that, on the Motion for the Adjournment to-night, I will call attention to this matter.

Mr. BUCHANAN: rose

Mr. SPEAKER: Notice has been given that the matter will be raised on the Motion for the Adjournment.

Mr. BUCHANAN: On a point of Order. May I not say, in regard to the last question—

Mr. SPEAKER: What is the point of Order?

Mr. BUCHANAN: My point of Order is this—and it is your ruling that I want— that every night the Government have suspended the Eleven o'Clock Rule, and, therefore, deprived private Members of the opportunity of raising a question on the Adjournment. I want to put this point to you, seeing that the Government have departed from a point of principle, and that we cannot raise the question of the Government's action for some time to come, whether you cannot, as exercising your right as the Speaker of this House, refuse permission to the Government to suspend the Eleven o'clock Rule, or give us an opportunity of moving the Adjournment of the House at a quarter-past eight?

Mr. SPEAKER: The Motion suspending the Eleven o'Clock Rule is the action of the House, not the action of the Chair.

Mr. BUCHANAN: On that point—

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member cannot take up Question Time in this way.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: 25.
asked the Secretary for Scotland whether he is aware that the unsatisfactory progress made with house building in Scotland is due to exclusive preference for Weir houses shown by the Government, and that, on account of dissatisfaction with the wages paid by Messrs. J. and G. Weir, progress in the erection of a number of houses has been stopped; and whether he will intimate the withdrawal of the call made by the Board of Health upon the principal municipal authorities of Scotland to unite in the erection of Weir houses only, seeing that this course involves increased cost with less efficiency while at the same time acting adversely to the interests of the workmen?

Sir J. GILMOUR: The Government has not shown any exclusive preference for Weir houses. In fact, in allocating the Demonstration Grant recently sanctioned by the Treasury, the type of new construction was left entirely to the local authorities themselves, subject to the type having been approved by the More Committee. I am aware that the erection
of a number of brick houses in the Middle Ward of Lanarkshire has been stopped owing to claims by the building trade that the work involved: in the construction of the Weir type of house is building trade work. No such call as is referred to in the latter part of the question has been made by the Scottish Board of Health, and I am not to be held as agreeing with the views expressed therein.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: Is it not the case that there are 1,035 houses held up, directly and indirectly, through this situation, and that the representation being made by the right hon. Gentleman. and urged at the same time, as I know, by the Minister of Health, is that there should be concentration upon steel houses, and that there is a particular desire to fasten upon Weir houses, even to the exclusion of other steel houses?

Sir WILLIAM DAVISON: Will the right hon. Gentleman say who is holding up these houses?

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I would like to ask the Secretary for Scotland if there is any truth in the rumour that is going round among certain quarters that he himself told certain local authorities that unless there was a certain percentage of Weir steel houses the grant would be withheld?

Sir J. GILMOUR: No, Sir, I did not give those terms. What I have said, and what I repeat, is that we must investigate all these problems, and I am meeting the local authorities on Monday next to discuss the matter.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: Will the right hon. Gentleman answer my points?

HON. MEMBERS: Order!

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: I put certain specific points, and I am asking the Minister to answer. My specific points are down here in a given question, and I want them answered.

Sir J. GILMOUR: To the best of my ability, I have answered the questions the hon. Member put down.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: What about the actual number of houses held up?

Sir J. GILMOUR: As far as I am aware something like 350 houses are at present being held up by the building trade.

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: I want to know—

HON. MEMBERS: Order!

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: That proves the case.

UNEMPLOYED JUVENILES (COMMITTEE OF INQUIRY).

Mr. WESTWOOD: 24.
asked the Secretary for Scotland if he proposes to set up a Committee for the purpose of inquiring into the education of unemployed juveniles; if so, when the Committee will be set up; and what will be the terms of reference or scope of the inquiry?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I propose, in consultation with my right hon. Friend the Minister of Labour, to appoint a Committee for Scotland with the same terms of reference as assigned to the Committee for England and Wales, namely:
to inquire into and advise upon the public system of education in Scotland in relation to the requirements of trade and industry, with particular reference to the adequacy of the arrangements for enabling young persons to enter into and retain suitable employment.
I am not yet in a, position to announce the names of the members of the Committee.

Mr. WESTWOOD: May I ask when the Committee is to be set up?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I hope to do it shortly.

EX-SERVICE MEN (SMALL, HOLDINGS).

Major Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR: 26.
asked the Secretary for Scotland how many first and second preference ox-service men there are in Scotland who have applied for small holdings but whose applications have not yet been granted; what precautions are taken to ensure that holdings are not given to men who subsequently sub-let them or portions of them; and what steps are taken to stop this practice?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Excluding applications which have been withdrawn, the Board of Agriculture have received up to the end of last month applications for new holdings and enlargements from 2,256 first preference and 1,419 second preference ex-service men which have not yet been granted. The sub-letting or subdivision of a new small holding without
the written consent of the landlord is prohibited by statutory provisions. I am informed that few cases of sub-letting other than seasonal lets of grass parks have come to the notice of the Board. If such a case occurs on any of the Board's properties steps are taken to secure the observance of the statutory provisions.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: Seeing that there are 3,500 ex-service men who have not received holdings seven years after the War, will not the right hon. Gentleman give us an assurance that a determined effort will be made to clear off these arrears?

Sir J. GILMOUR: Every effort has been and will be made to deal with applications for small holdings, but I would remind the hon. Member that, if the figures I have given are as stated, many of those men will probably not take up the holdings.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he is not aware that there axe tens of thousands of acres of land lying idle in Scotland that could be utilised in this fashion, and is he not also aware that the only thing that has increased, according to the last census, in the Highlands of Scotland are game-keepers?

Sir ROBERT HUTCHISON: Can the right hon. Gentleman do anything to alter the machinery whereby an allotment of land might be made to these men? In the last seven years over 3,000 men have been waiting, and does he not think something might be done to alter the machinery whereby a superior allotment of land might be made?

Mr. SPEAKER: That cannot be argued now. This question, I think, refers to sub-letting.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: But it is a serious question.

LIME KILNS, LOCH ERIBOL.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: 27.
asked the Secretary for Scotland whether, in view of the fact that the lime kilns at Loch Eribol situated on the property of the Board of Agriculture were the principal source of lime for the counties of Orkney, Caithness, and Sunderland, as well as for parts of Ross-shire, and in view of the recommendation of the Scottish conference on
agricultural policy that financial assistance should be given by the State for the re-opening of lime kilns, he now proposes to re-open the Loch Eribol lime kilns?

Sir J. GILMOUR: The Board of Agriculture are at present considering the best means of making a general survey of the supplies of lime and of existing and disused lime kilns in the country as recommended by the Agricultural Conference, and pending such survey it is proposed to defer consideration of the question of reopening the Loch Eribol lime kilns.

RESERVOIR DISASTER, SKELMORLIE.

Mr. STEPHEN: 28.
asked the Lord Advocate if his attention has been drawn to the jury's finding in connection with the bursting of a hillside reservoir at Skelmorlie, Ayrshire, on 18tth April, in which they returned a unanimous verdict that the five victims were drowned by water which escaped from the lower reservoir at Upper Skelmorlie and that the accident was materially contributed to by the absence of any regular skilled supervisor and inspector of the reservoir; and whether he intends to initiate a prosecution against the person or persons responsible?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL for SCOTLAND (Mr. Fleming): The matter referred to by the hon. Member is at present under consideration. I shall communicate with him when a decision is reached.

Mr. STEPHEN: Is it the case that the proprietor of this reservoir is Lord Eglington, and will there not be a prosecution in this matter?

Mr. HARDIE: In the investigation in which reference is made, is there not a report in existence, and can we know who was the engineer, and what were the recommendations he made?

Mr. SPEAKER: That question had better be put down.

Mr. MAXTON: In similar circumstances, arising out of the failure of the hon. and learned Gentleman to answer this question, if a railway engine-driver had been responsible would not a prosecution have been instituted? What is the law?

Mr. BUCHANAN: May I ask the hon. and learned Gentleman if he 16 aware that in connection with this matter an inquiry was held? This inquiry, we know, reported its finding some time ago. What action, if any, has been taken upon the findings; and, if not, why not?

The SOLICITOR - GENERAL for SCOTLAND: The matter is at present under consideration. A decision will, it is hoped, be reached shortly, and will be communicated to my hon. Friend.

AGRICULTURAL CONFERENCE.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: 46.
asked the Prime Minister whether his attention has been drawn to the Report of the Scottish Agricultural Conference; whether the decisions of the Government upon their recommendations will be announced: before the House rises for the Summer Recess; and whether time will be given for their discussion?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I have been asked to reply. The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. I do not anticipate that it will be possible to announce the decisions of the Government upon the recommendations of the Conference before the House rises for the Summer Itecess. It is not practicable at present to say what necessity or opportunity may arise for giving time for discussion.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: Is the right hon. Gentleman not aware that in recent years we have had Reports from several Commissions on conditions in Scotland, on which successive Governments have failed to announce any policy, and which are now lying in pigeon-holes in the Departments; and cannot we receive some assurance that we shall within a reasonable time have the decisions of the Government on this important Conference and obtain an opportunity for discussion of them?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I am certain the right hon. Gentleman may rest satisfied that decisions will be reached and announced as soon as possible.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: Shall we have an opportunity for discussion?

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL INDUSTRY.

SHIPMENTS FROM AMSTERDAM AND ROTTERDAM.

MINERS UNEMPLOYED.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: 71.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of coal-miners registered as unemployed at the end of June, 1924, October, 1924, and June, 1925; and also the number of all other persons registered as unemployed on the same dates?

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland): The numbers of unemployed coalminers whose books were lodged at Employment Exchanges in Great Britain were 59,728 at the end of June, 1924; 129,994 at end of October, 1924, and 314,639 at end of June, 1925. The number of books lodged in respect of workpeople in other insured trades at the same dates were 982,091, 1,102,561 and 1,024,081 respectively.

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

RATES (SUBSIDIES).

Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSON: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether he is willing to receive a deputation from the representatives of local authorities where
unemployment is most severe in order to discuss with them the effect of subsidising rates as a means of relieving depressed industries?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin): I am fully aware of the situation in the areas which the hon. Member has in mind, and I do not consider that any good purpose would be served by my receiving such a deputation.

Mr. THOMSON: In view of the seriousness of the position, could not the right hon. Gentleman see those authorities on the general question, if he cannot see them on the particular question named in the question?

The PRIME MINISTER: The Prime Minister has to deny himself many of the simple pleasures of life. This is one which I think might be enjoyed to greater advantage by one of his colleagues.

STATISTICS.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: 72.
asked the Minister of Labour what British industries are to-day employing more people than in 1914?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I regret that no statistics are available from which the numbers of workpeople employed in different industries in 1914 can be compared with those so employed at the present time.

UNINSURED PERSONS.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: 73.
asked the Minister of Labour the number of employed persons in this country who are not insured against unemployment?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Statistics are not available showing the number of employed persons who are not insured against unemployment; but, according to the population Census of 1921, the total number of employed persons aged 12 years and upwards in Great Britain was approximately 17,403,000, of whom it is estimated that less than a million are under the age of 16, and the estimated number of persons aged 16 years and upwards in Great Britain who were insured under the Unemployment Insurance Acts at July, 1921, was 11,429,000.

Oral Answers to Questions — TRANSPORT.

KINGSTON, BY-PASS ROAD.

Mr. PENNY: 35.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that dissatisfaction is being expressed at the slow progress being made in regard to the construction of the arterial road from Kingston Vale to Esher; will he state the reasons for the delay and what steps are being taken by the Ministry to expedite the work; whether he considers the road will be completed in the time and at the cost specified in the original contract; and, if not, what additional time and expenditure is likely to be involved before the work is completed?

The MINISTER of TRANSPORT (Colonel Ashley): The progress of the Kingston by-pass scheme, which is being carried out by the Surrey County Council, was hindered by adverse weather conditions last winter, and since then differences which have arisen between the County Council and the contractors have further delayed the work. Until these matters in difference have been determined, I regret that I am not in a position to give further particulars.

Mr. PENNY: Is the delay in any way due to the fact that they have to employ outside labour on these schemes?

Colonel ASHLEY: There are two reasons. The first is the weather, and the second is that there is a certain difference between the county council and the contracting firm.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the dispute between the county council and the firm in question is causing a good deal of hardship to the men because the work is not proceeding, and will he take steps to deal with the matter?

Colonel ASHLEY: The hon. Member must not assume that Government Departments never consider these questions. I have been dealing with this matter for the last six weeks. It is a very difficult question indeed.

ALEXANDRA PARK (RACE MEETINGS).

Colonel APPLIN: 38.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware that on race days at Alexandra Park trains from King's Cross to Enfield and Gordon Hill are taken off in order to provide extra
trains for the race traffic; and if he will take immediate steps to ensure that the transport facilities for business men and other residents in this district are not curtailed in this way in the future?

Colonel ASHLEY: The railway company inform me that it is not correct that suburban trains are cancelled specially on account of the race meetings at Alexandra Park, but that owing to the exigencies of station working at King's Cross, due to the duplication of up and down expresses and the running of long-distance excursions, it has been found necessary to cancel the running of four suburban trains between King's Cross and Finsbury Park on Saturdays from the 4th July to the 26th September, inclusive.

Colonel APPLIN: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider asking the company to grant greater facilities for train services, in view of the tremendous pressure on the public who cannot get home?

Colonel ASHLEY: I certainly will approach them again, but they inform me that they are working at full pressure.

ROAD REPAIRS, LONDON.

Colonel DAY: 39.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he is aware of the great inconvenience caused to business people and also to vehicular traffic using Wellington Street, the Strand, Blackfriars Bridge, and the Embankment at Norfolk and Arundel Streets by the roadmaking and repairs to roads now operating at these congested points; will he on future occasions issue an Order, as provided under the Traffic Act, so as to provide for adequate notice of such road stoppages being given, in order that public inconvenience will be minimised; and will he consider whether where important arterial ways have to undergo repairs portions of this work could be done at night by the employment of extra shifts of men?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am aware of the inconvenience caused to the travelling public during the execution of street works in the more important thoroughfares, but I would remind the hon. and gallant Member that these works are necessary if the streets are to be maintained in a condition fit to carry the traffic. I have no powers which would
enable me to compel road authorities to carry out their works at night, but with their willing co-operation arrangements have been made that works on the more important thoroughfares should be completed will all possible speed, not only by working where practical continuously day and night, but by the adoption of other methods, such as the use of quick-setting cement. The Act does not require me to give public notice of such works, but I have arranged for the issue of weekly statements to the Press showing the more important road works to be continued or commenced in central London during the ensuing fortnight.

Colonel DAY: Will the Minister say why it is necessary to have these repairs done on all these different arterial ways in the same district at the same time?

Colonel ASHLEY: I do not think that is the case. We try as hard as possible to co-ordinate these works so that parallel roads shall not be up at the same time.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: Will the right hon. Gentleman say if he finds any difficulty in the lack of powers to have this day and night work carried on? Cannot he come to this House for powers?

Colonel ASHLEY: It is a question of costs. Obviously, if you are going to compel local authorities to work day and night, you have got to find the money to meet the cost of that work. That is the difficulty at the present time.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Do not these delays in the traffic mean hundreds of thousands of pounds loss?

SOUTH-EASTERN TUBE RAILWAY (INQUIRY).

Dr. SALTER: 40.
asked the Minister of Transport whether a public inquiry is to be held as to the advisability of constructing a tube railway in South-east London; if so, when such inquiry is likely to take place and by whom the inquiry will be held; and whether the local authorities of the South London boroughs will be permitted to give evidence?

Colonel ASHLEY: The answer to the first part of the question is, so far as I am aware, in the negative. I may, however, explain that I have referred to the London Traffic Advisory Committee, for
their advice and report, questions relating to the alleged inadequacy of passenger-travelling facilities in certain districts of London, including the South-eastern district. The Committee inform me that they propose to hold public inquiries in connection with these questions, and that they will afford every opportunity to the local authorities concerned to present their views on the questions involved.

Dr. SALTER: I take it that this inquiry will not be under the auspices of the Ministry of Transport?

Colonel ASHLEY: It will be the London Traffic Advisory Committee, and they will report to me.

GOODS TRAFFIC (UNDERGROUND RAILWAYS).

Mr. RHYS: 41.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he is considering a scheme for underground railways designed exclusively for goods traffic in London; and, if so, whether financial aid from the Government is contemplated?

Colonel ASHLEY: The answer to the first part of this question is in the negative, and the point raised in the second part does not, therefore, arise.

ROAD FUND.

Brigadier-General CLIFTON -BROWN: 42.
asked the Minister of Transport whether the statement made by Sir Henry Maybury that the whole balance and revenue of the Road Fund up till 1931, amounting to £120,000,000, has already been allocated, was made with the authority of the Minister; if so, how much of this amount is earmarked for new construction and how much for unclassified rural roads; and whether the scheme will be placed before Parliament for sanction?

Colonel ASHLEY: I assume that my hon. and gallant Friend refers to the evidence given by Sir Henry Maybury before the Royal Commission on Local Government. The statement then made that as far as could be foreseen, the existing commitments would absorb the whole of the present balance and the revenues of the Road Fund up to the year 1930–31 was made with my authority. The general position as regards commitments is explained in the Road Fund Report for
1923–24, and fuller details will appear in the Annual Report for the year 1924–26 which will be presented to Parliament shortly. The allocations are made year by year with Treasury approval. As regards the provision to be made for unclassified rural roads during 1925–26, I am afraid I am not yet in a position to add anything to the answer which I gave to my hon. and gallant friend on the 16th June.

Brigadier-General C. BROWN: Is the Ministry allowed to sanction a programme of spending money without the sanction of Parliament?

Colonel ASHLEY: I have charge of the Road Fund. I have to get the sanction of the Treasury before I incur any expenditure.

HEAVY GOODS (HOURS OF DELIVERY).

Mr. W. BAKER: 44.
asked the Minister of Transport what restrictions are placed upon the delivery of coal in the main London thoroughfares during the busy hours of the day; whether such regulations have given satisfaction to the authorities; and whether he is prepared to recommend an extension of the regulations to cover other industries involving heavy and bulky goods?

Colonel ASKLEY: The answer is a long one, and I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Captain GARRO-JONES: Do the same or similar restrictions which apply to coal apply also to the delivery of beer or other alcoholic liquors?

Colonel ASHLEY: Yes, Sir, to a certain extent.

Following is the answer:

It is provided by Section 15 of the Metropolitan Streets Act, 1867, that between the hours of 10 a.m. and 6 p.m. no coal shall be loaded or unloaded on or across any footway within the "special limits" of that Act. The streets included within the "special limits" are shown on pages 31, 32 and 33 of the Metropolitan Traffic Manual, 1922. As regards the City of London, Regulations have been made in pursuance of Section 2, Sub-section (2), paragraphs B, C, D, of the City of London (Street Traffic) Act, 1909, providing that
between 9.30 a.m. and 7 p.m. on Mondays to Fridays, inclusive, and between 9.30 a.m. and 3 p.m. on Saturdays no coal or coke shall be loaded or unloaded on to any footway in any of the streets scheduled to the Regulations. A list of these streets will be found on page 41 of the Metropolitan Traffic Manual, 1922. The same restrictions apply to the loading or unloading of beer casks or beer barrels, both in the "special limits" referred to above and in the specified streets within the City of London. I have asked the London Traffic Advisory Committee to advise me whether it is desirable to make Regulations under Section 10 and paragraphs (7) and (8) of the Third Schedule of the London Traffic Act, 1924, prescribing the conditions subject to which, and the times at which,

(a) articles may be loaded on to or unloaded from vehicles, or vehicles of any particular class or description, on streets;

and

(b) vehicles, or vehicles of any particular class or description, delivering or collecting goods or merchandise, or delivering goods or merchandise of any particular class or classes, may stand in streets, or in streets of any class or description, or in specified streets.

RIVER TAY (ROAD BRIDGE).

Mr. SCRYMGEOUR: 53.
asked the Minister of Transport whether he is now in a position to report on the progress of the preliminary soundings requisite for consideration of the proposed road bridge over the Tay?

Colonel ASHLEY: I am glad to say that complete sets of soundings are now available, and I hope that borings will be commenced very shortly.

MOTOR TRAFFIC (THIRD PARTY RISKS).

Mr. W. BAKER: 43.
asked the Minister of Transport the percentage of private motor ears insured against third party risks; and how this compares with the experience of other countries?

Colonel ASHLEY: I have nothing to add to the answer which I gave yesterday to the hon. Member in reply to his question on the same subject.

INCOME TAX (REPAYMENT CLAIMS).

Major Sir HERBERT CAYZER: 48.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of the dissatisfaction that exists with the methods adopted by Income Tax officials dealing with claims for the repayment of Income Tax deducted at source from dividends, etc.; and whether he will take steps to abolish the system introduced last year which is unnecessary to secure the desired object, and creates difficulties and delay?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. W. Guinness): If, as I assume to be the ease, the question relates to the procedure adopted for verifying the identity of persons to whom repayment is made, I would invite the attention of the hon. and gallant Member to the statement I made on the subject in the course of the Debate on the Finance Bill in Committee and to the reply which I gave on the 19th June to the hon. Member for Guildford (Sir H. Buckingham). I am sending the hon. and gallant Member a copy of the statement and of the reply.

ENEMY ACTION CLAIMS.

Mr. T. THOMSON: 49.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what steps the Government propose to take to distribute the balance of £450,000 still in hand, out of the £5,300,000 voted by Parliament for compensation for damage done by enemy action?

Mr. GUINNESS: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to the question by the hon. Member for the Edge Hill Division (Mr. Hayes) on 9th July.

Mr. THOMSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that that reply did not refer to balances which had not been expended, and can he say whether the balances will be distributed amongst claimants?

Mr. GUINNESS: The right hon. Gentleman stated on that occasion, I think, that it was not yet possible to see what free balance would be left, and that the time to decide the allocation of that balance would be when it was struck.

SILK GOODS (PRICES).

Viscount SANDON: 51.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether his attention has been called to the intentions expressed in many cases to raise considerably the prices of goods made of silk and artificial silk as a result of the Finance Act; whether he will publish a White Paper, giving figures as to the effects of the duty on costs, in order to establish the limits of the zones of normal profits and illegitimate profiteering; whether such profiteering exists; whether he intends to take any action; and, if so, by what means?

Mr. GUINNESS: It is probably the case that some traders have attempted to stimulate sales of silk goods by advising their customers to buy at duty-free prices, and foreshadowing excessively increased prices in future, but I have no information that excessive prices are, in fact, at present being demanded. It is not practicable to issue a White Paper giving the effect of the Silk Duties upon the costs of production of the innumerable articles affected by them nor, as the Noble Lord is aware, have the Government power to control prices. But if he will let me have the details of any case in which, in his view, there is evidence that excessive prices are being charged, I shall be glad to have inquiry made.

INCOME TAX COLLECTORS (SALARIES).

Captain GARRO-JONES: 52.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether, in the computation of the amount of salary to be paid to Income Tax collectors, regard is paid to the amount of tax collected by them during previous years?

Mr. GUINNESS: No, sir.

Oral Answers to Questions — POST OFFICE.

INLAND CASH-ON-DELIVERY SYSTEM.

Mr. HANNON: 54.
asked the Postmaster-General whether any advance has been made in the proposals for the establishment of the cash-on-delivery system, particularly in regard to a system limited to agricultural produce?

Viscount WOLMER: The question of establishing an inland cash-on-delivery service is still the subject of inquiry by the Government, and I am not yet in a position to make any further statement on the subject.

Mr. HANNON: Will my noble Friend accelerate this inquiry as much as possible, so that the rural producer will get an opportunity of selling his products?

Viscount WOLMER: I will do my best.

ANGLO-GERMAN TELEPHONIC SERVICE.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: 55.
asked the Postmaster-General when it is proposed to establish the telephone service between North Germany and the north-east coast of England, whether the work is being proceeded with, and when it is expected to be completed?

Viscount WOLMER: It is hoped to open an Anglo-German telephone service in about 12 months' time. The circuits will pass through Holland. The sub marine cable is on order by the Dutch Government, and the various land lines are being laid.

EMPIRE WIRELESS CHAIN.

Mr. AMMON: 57.
asked the Postmaster-General whether, in connection with the development of the Empire wireless chain, the sites have yet been acquired for the erection of the signalling stations for communicating between Great Britain and Australia and India?

Viscount WOLMER: Sites near Grimsby (for the transmitting station) and near Skegness (for the receiving station) have been selected for the Beam Stations for communication with Australia and India, and it is hoped that the purchase of the various properties concerned will be completed at an early date. The order for the erection of these stations has already been placed with the contractors.

CONTINENTAL LETTERS (STAMP VOUCHERS).

Mr. AMMON: 58.
asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware that the cost of a stamp voucher for reply to correspondence with the Continent has been raised from 3d. to 6d.; and, seeing that the value of a postage stamp to foreign countries is 2½d., what is the reason for charging this excess amount?

Viscount WOLMER: The price was fixed at 6d. because, under the provisions of the Madrid Convention, 1920, exchanged coupons are accounted for between the countries of issue and exchange at the rate of 50 gold centimes per coupon. Apart from this, a lower price might lead to speculation in the coupons, as they are exchangeable in any country of the Postal Union for a postage stamp or stamps representing the postage on a single rate letter from that country for a place abroad, and this may be as much as 50 gold centimes. The price will be reduced to 4d. under the regulations of the Stockholm Convention, which comes into operation on 1st October.

SORTERS (HEIGHT STANDARD).

Mr. MELLER: 59.
asked the Postmaster-General if his attention has been called to the case of T. C. Church, of Mitcham, who recently passed an examination qualifying for the post of a sorter, and has been refused appointment on the ground that he is half an inch under standard height; whether he is aware that his height did not preclude his serving in the great War, and that he has for some time past acted as temporary postman and sorter; and whether he will reconsider the case?

Viscount WOLMER: The Regulations respecting the competitions for appointment as sorter, which were brought to Mr. Church's notice when he applied for permission to enter for the competition, distinctly state that the candidate must be of the prescribed height of 5 feet 4 inches, and that the fact that an under-height candidate is nominated inadvertently to take part in a competition gives him no claim to a waiving of the Regulations. In view of the size of the sorting frames, it is necessary that the height Regulations should be maintained, and I am sorry that I am unable to make an exception in Mr. Church's favour.

Mr. MELLER: Does not the hon. Gentleman think the time has now arrived when this very unfair Regulation might be withdrawn?

Viscount WOLMER: No, Sir, because the sorting frames are all constructed on the hypothesis that the sorters are of a certain height, and we must draw the line somewhere.

Mr. MELLER: Surely in view of the fact that the gentleman to whom I have
referred in my question has been sorting for some considerable time, the difficulty in this case might have been overcome by providing him with a half-inch board?

Viscount WOLMER: I am afraid we could not do that.

Mr. HANNON: Has the Noble Lord no discretion as to modifying these Regulations?

Viscount WOLMER: Yes, Sir. But if we reduce the height by half-an-inch, people who were thereby shut out would immediately ask for the height to be further reduced, and, as I say, we have got to draw the line somewhere.

Sir GRATTAN DOYLE: In view of the well-known success which attended the formation of bantam regiments in the War, will my Noble Friend consider the formation of a bantam force in this case?

Viscount WOLMER: I am afraid there is no analogy between bantam regiments and sorting in the Post Office.

Mr. PENNY: If the same test were applied to Members on the Treasury Bench, should we not lose a great many valuable Ministers?

IMITATION TYPE-WRITTEN CIRCULARS.

Mr. SMEDLEY CROOKE: 63.
asked the Postmaster-General if he can see his way to reduce the permitted minimum number of circulars in imitation type-written characters by post to allow of small committees of 10 or 15 to be circularised under the cheap rate?

Viscount WOLMER: Circulars in imitation type-written characters or reproduced by a mechanical process from a typewritten original are admitted at the printed papers rate of postage as a concession under certain safeguards which are necessary in order to protect the revenue. In view of the expense which their special treatment involves, I am afraid I cannot extend the concession to batches of less than 20.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH BROADCASTING COMPANY.

"RADIO TIMES" SUPPLEMENT.

Captain GARRO-JONES: 61.
asked the Postmaster-General whether he is aware
that the British Broadcasting Company is producing a journal known as the Continental Radio Times; whether the terms of the agreement between the British Broadcasting Company and himself admit of the carrying on of a newspaper and publishing business; and what it is proposed should be done with the profits from this journal?

Viscount WOLMER: I understand that the British Broadcasting Company are arranging to issue a periodical, to be known as "The Radio Supplement," containing detailed programmes of foreign stations, which now appear in abbreviated form in "The Radio Times." The issue of such a periodical will not be contrary to the terms of the agreement between the company and the Post Office. The financial arrangements are being discussed between the company and the broadcasting organisations whose programmes will be published; and any net profit which may accrue to the company will fall to be dealt with as income under the general conditions of their licence.

LICENCE FEES.

Sir R. GOWER: 62.
asked the Postmaster-General whether his attention has been called to the profits made by the British Broadcasting Company during the past financial year; and, seeing that the extent of such profits is largely due to the sum received in respect of licence fees, will he consider the desirability of reducing the licence duty paid by users of receiving sets?

Viscount WOLMER: The whole of the profits received by the British Broadcasting Company after their payment of 7½ per cent. dividend, which absorbs only £5,172, has been invested in additions to plant. The Postmaster-General does not propose to reduce the licence fee pending the Report of the Committee which the Government are about to appoint to examine the arrangements, financial and otherwise, for the maintenance of the broadcasting service.

Mr. MACKINDER: Would not the Postmaster-General consider the advisability of recommending the reduction of the fee for the holders of crystal sets?

Viscount WOLMER: I think they get very good value for their money.

Mr. MACKINDER: The others get more.

SOLICITATION.

Sir H. CAYZER: 64.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether he will consider the question of the appointment of a Departmental Committee to inquire into the laws with regard to solicitation and their administration, in view of the demand for such an investigation?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the HOME DEPARTMENT (Mr. Godfrey Locker-Lampson): The Home Secretary is considering this, but has not yet had time to arrive at a carefully thought out line of procedure.

RUBBER PRODUCTION, MALAYA AND CEYLON.

Colonel DAY: 65.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies if he is aware that, owing to the restriction scheme which was drawn up in accordance with the recommendation of the Stevenson Committee, which is in operation in the Malay States and Ceylon, the production of rubber has decreased by 50,500 tons per annum, which has had a resultant effect of increasing the price of rubber from 1s. 1d. per pound at the beginning of the year to 3s. 9d. per pound on the 8th July, 1925, with the effect that all manufactured rubber goods, including tyres, have been advanced accordingly; and will he consider having an inquiry held into this policy of restricting output with the resulting increase of prices?

Mr. WADDINGTON: 66.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he is aware that rubber has advanced in price nearly 100 per cent. during the last few months; that rubber is now an important raw material for the shoe and slipper industry in this country; that the high price is causing unemployment; and will he remove all restrictions imposed under the Stevenson Ordinance on the export of rubber from British possessions, and thereby check the profiteering now taking place?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Mr. Ormsby-Gore): My right hon. Friend is aware of the
recent rise in the price of rubber, but according to the best estimates of the situation and prospects of the plantation rubber industry, he can only regard its present extent as a temporary movement. He is not aware that there is any justification for the suggestion that unemployment in this country has arisen or is arising as a result of the present prices, and as at present advised, there appears to him no ground in present circumstances for a special inquiry, or for proposing to the Governments in Ceylon and Malaya that the time has come to repeal their legislative measures. The amount which can be exported at the minimum duty is increased by 10 per cent. quarterly if the price remains above 18d. a pound. If therefore there should prove to be a real shortage it will in the course of the next few months be possible to release the maximum production, and there is no reason, if a continued demand is expected, why growers should not increase their production in anticipation of this. The whole situation is being carefully watched.

Colonel DAY: Is the Under-Secretary aware that, since the introduction of the restriction scheme, the rubber from the Dutch plantations has increased from 15 per cent. to 37 per cent.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I am aware of it.

Mr. WADDINGTON: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the bulk of the rubber which middlemen are now handling at 4s. per 1b. has been sold by the producer at 1s. 4d. and 1s. 10d. per 1b.?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I am aware of that.

Mr. WADDINGTON: Is he also aware that in February next the export restrictions under the Stevenson scheme will come to an end, and all the producers know this and are accumulating stocks, and will it not be in the interests of trade and the regulation of prices that more exports should be permitted now, and thus prevent a slump in February.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: That is a question which is rather too long for me to answer as a supplementary question. Yesterday I made a small slip in answering this question which I will correct. The whole matter is watched with the
advice of an expert committee, and while we agree with the hon. Member that prices are likely to come down consideraably from the present speculative boom, we do not think the abolition of the Stevenson scheme, or its modification, would materially assist now or in a few months' time.

Mr. THOMAS: Will the Under-Secretary consider the advisability of the Government making an immediate statement with regard to the future of the scheme. The important point for the moment is the uncertainty as to whether it will continue, and will the Government undertake to make an early statement on this question?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I will consult my right hon. Friend on that point.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Is it not strange that if this had happened to be a case of the workers, at once the whole of those hon. Members sitting on the benches opposite would be up in arms and say that this was a case of "ca'canny."

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I would like the hon. Member to understand that this scheme was in operation when the late Government were in office.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: But two blacks do not make a white.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: There is no restriction of production now. It is only an automatic scheme whereby only a limited proportion of the standard output is allowed to be exported at a minimum rate of exportation. Therein there comes to be paid to the Ceylon and Malay Governments an increased amount of duty, and there is no question of ca'canny about it. The whole object has been to preserve the existence of the industry by which thousands of people obtain their livelihood.

Several hon. Members rose—

Mr. SPEAKER: This question can be raised next week on the Estimates for the Department.

EAST AFRICA (TRANSPORT DEVELOPMENT).

Mr. WADDINGTON: 67.
asked the Secretary of State for the Colonies
whether he is aware that dissatisfaction exists in Lancashire at the delay of the Government in introducing the East African Transport Loan Guarantee Bill recommended by the East African Commission, and will he state when the Bill will be introduced?

Mr. QRMSBY-GORE: I regret that I am not in a position to add anything to previous replies on this subject.

Mr. WADDINGTON: When will a satisfactory reply be given? The point is of very great importance for cotton development.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: As the hon. Member knows, the scheme propounded in the Report of myself and my colleagues on East Africa would require legislation in this House, and I think, in view of the state of Parliamentary business, it would be very difficult for the Prime Minister to say—even if he approves of the scheme— that it would be possible to introduce a Bill of this kind.

Mr. THOMAS: Does not this scheme foreshadow a possible solution of the unemployment problem by providing work, and is not that a greater question than the question of Parliamentary time?

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Undoubtedly if the scheme proposed in the Commission's Report were approved, and put in the form of an Act of Parliament, it would provide a great deal of work for the iron and steel industry of the country.

Mr. WADDINGTON: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that that Report is the unanimous finding of Conservatives, Liberals and Labour Members, and therefore it is an agreed Measure?

OLD AGE PENSIONS.

Sir H. CAYZER: 69.
asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware of the hardship caused to old age pensioners by reason of their having to pay a fee of 3s. 7d. for a copy of their birth certificate in order to establish their claim; and whether he can embody a Clause in the Widows, Orphans, and Old Age Contributory Pensions Bill now before Parliament to enable these pensioners to obtain a copy of their birth certificate free of charge or at some nominal fee?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): My hon. and gallant Friend has been misinformed. Applicants for old age pensions are not required to produce their birth certificates in support of their claims: and any verification from the birth registers required by the pensions officer is furnished to him gratuitously by the General Register Office. The second part of the question does not, therefore, arise.

FOOD POISONING, LAMBETH.

Colonel DAY: 70.
asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that recently in the Borough of Lambeth it was found that a local meat retailer boiled pork and beef in a portable copper situated in a yard full of flies and other insects attracted by neighbouring dustbins, and that the medical officer of health traced 24 cases of food poisoning to this tainted source; and will he consider introducing legislation to give local authorities-increased power in order to deal with such practices which are dangerous to public health?

Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend has received a copy of the report of the medical officer of health on the case to which the hon. and gallant Member refers. He is considering what steps may be practicable and desirable with a view to regulating the conditions under which food is prepared.

Colonel DAY: As this is a very serious question, is the hon. Gentleman aware that, if the local authorities had wider powers, practices of this kind could not exist; and will he take steps to give local authorities power to put a atop to these things?

Sir K. WOOD: I do not think the hon. and gallant Gentleman heard my reply. I stated that my right hon. Friend was considering what steps he could take which were practical and desirable.

Colonel DAY: I did hear the reply, but while we are waiting many people may be killed by having to consume bad food.

MARINE FOG SIGNALLING.

Mr. VIANT: 7.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether, in view of
the continued loss of life at sea as the result of fog and the inability of his Department to recommend for adoption any other method of signalling than that which is at present in vogue, he will state the difficulties, Departmental, national or international, with which his Department is confronted in respect thereto?

Sir P. CUNLIFFE- LISTER: Apart from the fact that these Regulations are governed by international agreement, the practical difficulty has been that alternative systems, which in theory seem attractive, have been considered as likely to increase rather than diminish confusion at sea in a fog. But if the hon. Member has some particular method of signalling in mind, and will send me information about it, I will have the matter looked into.

HOUSE OF LORDS (EMPIRE LEATHER).

Sir R. GOWER: 74.
asked the Undersecretary of State for the Home Department, as representing the First Commissioner of Works, whether he is aware that in an invitation extended by the Office of Works to leather dealers to tender estimates for the supply of morocco for re-upholstering the benches of the House of Lords it is stipulated that the animals from whose skins such morocco is made must be of European origin, and that the effect of such stipulation is to prevent skins produced in the British Empire being the subject of such estimates; and whether he will withdraw such stipulation and substitute for it one requiring that such leather must be Empire produced?

Mr. G. LOCKER-LAMPSON: (for
No invitations to tender for morocco for the benches of the House of Lords have yet been issued, and no stipulation is proposed which would prevent tenderers from submitting skins produced in the British Empire.

Brigadier-General Sir HENRY CROFT: Will there not be a stipulation that these skins shall be produced in the British Empire?

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON: I think one must have some regard to what quantity and standard can be produced.

Sir W. DAVISON: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that 90 per cent. of the goatskins coming into this country come from the British Empire or India, and does he not think that from that large percentage sufficiently good skins can be got for this purpose?

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON: I very much hope that we shall be able to use skins from the British Empire.

Sir W. DAVISON: Will not the hon. Gentleman insist upon British skins being used for this purpose?

Sir H. CROFT: Provided he is satisfied that the skins are of equal quality, will the hon. Gentleman make a stipulation that they shall be produced within the British Empire?

Mr. LOCKER-LAMPSON: If the skins are of good quality, certainly British Empire skins will be used.

Major HORE-BELISHA: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that the very word "Morocco" suggests that this article cannot be produced in the British Empire?

Mr. THURTLE: Is the hon. Gentleman quite satisfied that all the skins of the Noble Lords are British?

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Motion made, and Question put,
That the Proceedings on the Widows. Orphans, and Old Age Contributory Pensions Bill be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[The Prime Minister.]

The House divided: Ayes, 246; Noes, 118.

Division No. 269.]
AYES.
[3.46 p. m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Astor, Viscountess
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Berry, Sir George


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Balniel, Lord
Betterton, Henry B.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Blades, Sir George Rowland


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Blundell, F. N.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Boothby, R. J. G.


Ashley Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Nuttall, Ellis


Brass, Captain W.
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
Oakley, T.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Orsmby-Gore, Hon. William


Briggs, J. Harold
Hammersley, S. S.
Pennefather, Sir John


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hanbury, C.
Penny, Frederick George


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Brown, Maj. D. C.(N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Harland, A.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Harrison, G. J. C.
Pielou, D. P.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hartington, Marquess of
Pilcher, G.


Bullock, Captain M.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Preston, William


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Hawke, John Anthony
Raine, W.


Burman, J. B.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Ramsden, E.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Campbell, E. T.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Remer, J. R.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Holt, Capt. H. P.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Homan, C. W. J.
Ropner, Major L.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Salmon, Major I.


Christie, J. A.
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Clarry, Reginald George
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Clayton, G. C.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Sandon, Lord


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Savery, S. S.


Cooper, A. Duff
Huntingfield, Lord
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Cope, Major William
Hurd, Percy A.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Couper, J. B.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Sinclair, Col. T.(Queen's Univ., Belfast)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Skelton, A. N.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Jacob, A. E.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Jephcott, A. R.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston).
Smithers, Waldron


Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Somerville, A. A. (Windson)


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Lamb, J. Q.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Lane-fox, Colonel George R.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Dawson, Sir Philip
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Dixey, A. C.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Loder, J. de V.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Looker, Herbert William
Sykes. Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Lougher, L.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Elveden, Viscount
MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


England, Colonel A.
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Tinne, J. A.


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Macintyre, Ian
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
McLean, Major A.
Waddington, R.


Everard, W. Lindsay
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Warrender, Sir Victor


Fermoy, Lord
Malone, Major P. B.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Fleming, D. P.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Ford, P. J.
Margesson, Captain D.
Watts, Dr. T.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Wells, S. R.


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Meller, R. J.
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Frece, Sir Walter de
Meyer, Sir Frank
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Ganzoni, Sir John
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central).


Gates, Percy
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Goff, Sir Park
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Wolmer, Viscount


Gower, Sir Robert
Morrison, H. (Wills, Salisbury)
Womersley, W. J.


Grace, John
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Murchison, C. K.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H.(W'th's'w, E)
Nelson, Sir Frank



Gretton, Colonel John
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Commander B. Eyres Monsell and


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Colonel Gibbs.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Barker, G. (Monmoulh, Abertillery)
Charleton, H. C.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Barnes, A.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Batey, Joseph
Compton, Joseph


Ammon, Charles George
Broad, F. A.
Connolly, M.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Bromley, J.
Cove, W. G.


Baker, Walter
Buchanan, G.
Dalton, Hugh




Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kennedy, T.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Day, Colonel Harry
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Dunnico, H.
Kenyon, Barnet
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Kirkwood, D.
Snell, Harry


Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Lansbury, George
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lawson, John James
Stamford, T, W.


Gillett, George M.
Lee, F.
Stephen, Campbell


Gosling, Harry
Livingstone, A. M.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Lowth, T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Greenall, T.
Lunn, William
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mackinder, W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
March, S.
Thurtle, E.


Grundy, T. W.
Maxton, James
Tinker, John Joseph


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Hall, Fredk. (Yorks, Normanton)
Montague, Frederick
Viant, S. P.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Morris, R. H.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Hardle, George D.
Naylor, T. E.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Harney, E. A.
Oliver, George Harold
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Hayday, Arthur
Ponsonby, Arthur
Westwood, J.


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Potts, John S.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-e-Spring)
Wheatley, W.


Hirst, G. H.
Ritson, J.
Wiggins, William Martin


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Rose, Frank H.
Wilson, R, J. (Jarrow)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter
Windsor, Walter


Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Wright, W.


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sexton, James
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)



Kelly, W. T.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Warne.

SELECTION (STANDING COMMITTEES).

SCOTTISH STANDING COMMITTEE.

Mr. William Nicholson reported from the Committee of Selection; That they had added the following Fifteen Members to the Standing Committee on Scottish Bills (in respect of the Education (Scotland) (Superannuation) Bill): the Lord Advocate, Lord Balniel, Mr. Bethel, Sir Henry Cowan, Major Crawfurd, Sir Hugh Lucas-Tooth, Mr. Robert Morrison, Mr. Palin, Mr. Robert Richardson, Mr. West Russell, Dr. Simms, Colonel Sinclair, Major Steel, Sir Victor Warrender, and Mr. Windsor.

Report to lie upon the Table.

Orders of the Day — CONTRIBUTORY PENSIONS BILL.

Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Bill further considered in Committee.

[Mr. JAMES HOPE in the Chair.]

CLAUSE 18.—(Widows and orphans pensions when husband or parent died before the commencement of Act.)

Mr. SMEDLEY CROOKE: I beg to move, in page 17, line 34, after the word "force," to insert the words
or if the deceased husband served in His Majesty's forces for a period of seven days or more during the great War.
This Amendment relates to the widows of ex-service men who served in the Forces and engaged in a one-man business with the aid of funds from the Civil Liabilities Fund. Since 1919 over 118,000 men have been set up from the Civil Liabilities Fund and since 1920 more than 3,700 men have been started in business on small loans. Under the Bill the widows of these men would not be eligible. The question may be raised as to why the period of seven days is inserted. That is put in because that is the qualifying period to enable a man to join the British Legion. I understand the branches of the British Legion throughout the country are anxious that this should be allowed.

The MINISTER of HEALTH (Mr. Neville Chamberlain): I will not discuss the point as to whether widows of men who served for so short a period as seven days in the Great War should be entitled to benefits that are not given to the widows of any other men, because whatever the merits of the case might be, this is really not a Bill in which to insert a provision of that kind. This is a contributory scheme of pensions linked up with the National Insurance Act, and a provision of this kind cuts right across the whole fundamental basis of the scheme and takes no account whatever of the insurable status or the connection of the deceased with insurance. Under those circumstances it would be impossible for me to accept the Amendment, and I hope my hon. Friend will not think it necessary to press it.

4.0 P.M.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: I am sure hon. Members in all parts of the House heard the right hon. Gentleman's speech, which was short and very much to the point, with disappointment. I think he swept aside the intentions of the Amendment for altogether inadequate reasons. This is a Bill to give pensions to widows with young children. That is the salient feature of the whole Bill, and it is carrying cut part of an undertaking given by the present Government through their leaders during the last Election. Suppose at that time the Prime Minister —I was otherwise engaged, and did not attend his meetings—was asked, "Will this widows' pension scheme that you are pledging the Conservative party to apply to the widows of men who served in the War where they are not otherwise entitled to a pension?" does anyone suppose he would have hesitated to say, "Undoubtedly it will. If I can possibly do it I shall do so." Of course, he would probably save himself by saying he would have to consult experts and actuaries, as experienced politicians like the Prime Minister do, but he would not have got up and made a reply like that of the Minister of Health at all. He would not have said: "This is a contributory insurance scheme and this is not the place nor the time to put it in." If you are going to make the Bill retrospective in the case of those men because they were employed in insured occupations, are you going to say that service in His Majesty's Forces is not an insurable occupation, and is not worthy of attention in the same way as service in a trade or industry? Take the case of two brothers, one of whom was not allowed to go to the front because his work was required in a munition factory, and the other of whom did go to the front. A week before this Bill comes into operation both of them are killed, perhaps in the same accident. The widow of the one gets a pension, and the widow of the other is not entitled to a, pension. The thing will not bear a moment's examination. Any body of ordinary, simple-minded, common-sense people who look at the rough justice of these things, which after all is very often most valuable, would agree that you could not tell the widow of the man deprived of her pension: "Well, this is an Insurance Bill, and it only applies to certain employments, or
to people earning under a certain amount of money." "But," this woman would say, "My sister-in-law is getting it." "Yes, but her husband was in insured employment." "But was not my husband in insured employment?" "No, he was a hawker—or he kept a shop—because he went into the Army and did not continue working in the factory." That is not a far-fetched example of the injustice that will be done if this Amendment be not accepted. I hope, therefore, that the Committee will press this Amendment until the right hon. Gentleman gives way. At any rate, we ought to have much more adequate reasons than those given by the right hon. Gentleman in his speech.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: I hope the Minister will reconsider his decision. Many of us know the difficulties under which these men have laboured trying to establish a small business. Many of them have established these businesses because during the War period the younger men missed their opportunity of being taught a trade, and because many of those who had followed a trade beforehand found when they came back that they could no longer follow that trade. They were able, with assistance such as the hon. Member for Deritend (Mr. Smedley Crooke), who moved the Amendment, described, to start some small business. The whole question is whether men with small businesses in receipt of incomes under £250 per year ought to come under the voluntary Clauses of this Bill, and it is one which I hope the Minister will consider.

The CHAIRMAN: I cannot help thinking that the hon. Member is mistaking the Amendment which we are discussing. It is to add the words
or if the deceased husband served in His Majesty's forces for a period of seven days or more during the great War.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: I understood that was the Amendment.

The CHAIRMAN: I thought that the hon. Member was arguing the special position of those in business and not insured, but perhaps he will be able to connect his argument with the case of ex-service men.

Mr. WOMERSLEY: I bow to your ruling, and will only add that I hope
the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider his decision in this matter. There is a strong feeling, even among his own party, in favour of this Amendment, and, personally, I shall be most disappointed if he does not promise to go into the matter further, so that something may be done on the Report stage.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I know that the Minister has already made a concession in the case of men who have served two years in the Army, and I would ask him whether he could not go a step further and accept at least some modification of this Amendment. I agree that a good number of men have entered into small businesses who in normal time would never have done so. Those men served in the Army, not possibly for two years, but for some shorter period, and I hope, in view of all the circumstances, in view of the large increase in this class of men, who are well deserving the sympathy and support of Members of this House, that the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider his decision.

Mr. DIXEY: I would like to ask the right hon. Gentleman if he could not see his way to accept this Amendment. These are most deserving people, and, even if the period of seven days be too short, I personally think that they are more entitled to consideration than any other class in the country. Therefore, I would beg the Government to consider whether they could not accept this very reasonable Amendment.

Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSON: I would like to join in the appeal which has been made by Members on all sides of the Committee. The Minister has stated that this Amendment cuts across the contributory system, and that, if we accept it, many will be admitted who have not contributed to the scheme. I submit that that is the case with regard to all who come under this Clause. Although they may be deemed to be insured, they have not been insured for the purposes of this Act. Therefore, the whole of the beneficiaries who come under this Clause will not have contributed, and there is nothing contrary to that principle in accepting the Amendment. I hope that if the Minister cannot accept it in its present form, he will at least accept it with a slight extension of the period.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 133; Noes, 214.

Division No. 270]
AYES.
[4.9 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Rose, Frank H.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Runciman, Rt. Hon. Walter


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, G. H.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Ammon, Charles George
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sexton, James


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Barnes, A.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Batey, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Bromley, J.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Buchanan, G.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Charleton, H. C.
Kelly, W. T.
Snell, Harry


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kennedy, T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Compton, Joseph
Kenyon, Barnet
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Cove, W. G.
Kirkwood, D.
Stamford, T. W.


Crooks, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Lawson, John James
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, F.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Day, Colonel Harry
Lowth, T.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dunnico, H.
Lunn, William
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Tinker, John Joseph


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


England, Colonel A.
Mackinder, W.
Viant, S. P.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Malone, Major P. B.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
March, S.
Warne, G. H.


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Maxton, James
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Gibbins, Joseph
Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gillett, George M.
Montague, Frederick
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Gosling, Harry
Morris, R. H.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Greenall, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, North)
Westwood, J.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Naylor, T. E.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Oliver, George Harold
Whiteley, W.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wiggins, William Martin


Groves, T.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grundy, T. W.
Pielou, D. P.
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Potts, John S.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Windsor, Walter


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Womersley, W. J.


Hardle, George D.
Ritson, J.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Harney, E. A.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich)



Harris, Percy A.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)
Lieut.-Commander Kenworthy and


Hayday, Arthur
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Mr. Dixey.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bullock, Captain M.
Dawson, Sir Philip


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Dean, Arthur Wellesley


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Burman, J. B.
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Drewe, C.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Campbell, E. T.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cauttey, Sir Henry S.
Elveden, Viscount


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)


Astor, Viscountess
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith


Balniel, Lord
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Everard, W. Lindsay


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Chapman, Sir S.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Christie, J. A.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Clarry, Reginald George
Fermoy, Lord


Berry, Sir George
Clayton, G. C.
Fleming, D. P.


Betterton, Henry B.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Ford, P. J.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Blundell, F. N.
Cooper, A. Duff
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cooper, J. B.
Frece, Sir Walter de


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Brass, Captain W.
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Ganzoni, Sir John


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Briggs, J. Harold
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Goff, Sir Park


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Gower, Sir Robert


Buckingham, Sir H.
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Grace, John


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H.(W'th's'w, E)
Lougher, L.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wills, Westb'y)


Gretton, Colonel John
Lumley, L. R.
Sinclair, Col. T.(Queen's Univ., Belfast)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Skelton, A. N.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Macintyre, Ian
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Hall, Vice Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
McLean, Major A.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Hammersley, S. S.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Smithers, Waldron


Hanbury, C.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Harland, A.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Harrison, G. J. C.
Margesson, Capt. D.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Hartington, Marquess of
Meller, R. J.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Meyer, Sir Frank
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Haslam, Henry C.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Hawke, John Anthony
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Murchison, C. K.
Waddington, R.


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Nelson, Sir Frank
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Homan, C. W. J.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Nuttall, Ellis
Warrender, Sir Victor


Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Oakley, T.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Huntingfield, Lord
Penny, Frederick George
Watts, Dr. T.


Hurst, Gerald B.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Wells, S. R.


Hutchison, G. A. Clark(Midl'n & P'bl's)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
White, Lieut.-Colonel G Dairymple


Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Pilcher, G.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Jacoh, A. E.
Raine, W.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Ramsden, E.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Jephcott, A. R.
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)



Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Ropner, Major L.
Wolmer, Viscount


Lamb, J. Q.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Lane-Fox, Colonel George R.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Salmon, Major I.



Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Major Sir Harry Barnston and


Loder, J. de V.
Sandon, Lord
Major Cope.

The following Amendment stood on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. BASIL PETO: in page 17, line 34, after the word "force," to insert the words,
or if the deceased husband served in the police, Post Office, or any Civil Service employment under conditions which did not provide for a pension for his widow, and whose rate of pay at the time of his retirement or decease was such as to have qualified him to be insured under the Insurance Act had he been in insurable employment.

The CHAIRMAN: With respect to the Amendment which stands in the name of the hon. Member for Barnstaple (Mr. Basil Peto), he has also a New Clause on the Paper—(Widows of persons in Civil Service employment)—which covers very much the same ground, and I should have thought that it would be better to deal with the subject on the New Clause, whether in its present form or otherwise. If the hon. Member wishes to tell me why the Amendment should be taken now, I should be glad to hear him.

Mr. PETO: My desire to move the Amendment now was in view of what the Minister of Health said yesterday. I
want to raise the question now in order to give him time to consider the matter before the new Clauses are reached, in the hope that some provision may be made of an even more beneficial character.

The CHAIRMAN: What was in my mind was that if T called the hon. Member now, my mind might be a little biased when it came to the question of selecting his Now Clause. I do not know whether he is willing to take the risk of that.

Mr. PETO: In view of that statement, I should like to facilitate the proceedings this afternoon and to wait for the New Clause.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: I beg to move, in page 18, line 6, at the end, to insert the words
or if the widow is over fifty years of age and is without children under fourteen years of age, in which case she shall receive a widow's pension in no case exceeding ten shillings a week, and calculated in the same manner as need pensions under the royal warrant for war pensions.
Many of us have received communications from elderly widows without
children under 14 who are under a certain sense of grievance because, obviously, they have no legal claim and will not benefit in any way under this Bill. In order to attempt to meet these cases, I and my hon. Friends who are associated with me have drafted this Amendment. I have endeavoured to make some investigation as to what this Amendment involves. Between the ages of 50 and 55 there are 134,000 widows without children under 14; between 55 and 60 there are 214,000; between 60 and 65 there are 255,000; and between 65 and 70 there are 279,000. A great number of these are not widows of insured persons. I have endeavoured to the best of my ability to make an estimate of the number of persons who would be affected by this Amendment if it were incorporated in the Bill. In the first group, that is, widows between the age of 50 and 55, there are about 100,000 who would be affected; between the ages of 55 and 60 there would be 150,000; between 60 and 65 there would be 160.000; and between 65 and 70 about 150,000.
Altogether, there are between 500,000 and 600,000 widows between the ages of 50 and 70 without children under 14. They represent an enormous burden and a burden so great that if this Amendment were incorporated in the Bill in its bare form it would wreck the finance of the Bill. But the Amendment is drawn in such a way that they do not get necessarily the full pension. We have used the existing machinery—namely, the method of calculating the need pensions under the Royal Warrant for the purpose of assessing these pensions. I estimate that the cost would be £8,000,000 in the first year, which would diminish and would be gradually wiped out in 15 or 20 years. I had no conception of the immense burden that this Amendment represented in the first instance. I cannot hope that the Minister will accept it, but I move it formally because it would be very valuable that we should have a statement from the Minister in order to let these people know what an immense burden this ex gratia payment to thorn would mean. We must recognise that the whole of the payments to the existing widows and orphans are acts of grace and are not pensions paid of right because of contribution;. I move the Amendment, although under the circumstances I do
not expect the Minister to accept it. [HON. MEMBERS: "Will you vote for it? "] No, I shall not vote for it in that form. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why waste time?"] I am not wasting time. It is only right that these large numbers of people who may have a sense of grievance should be informed of the circumstances, because their sense of grievance may disappear when they realise the financial obligation that would be imposed on the country if this benefit were extended to them.

The ATTORNEY - GENERAL (Sir Douglas Hogg): My hon. Friend has stated the answer to his own Amendment, and I can hardly improve on it. The fact that he has stated the answer is no discredit to him. It is an easy thing to move grants of public money, but it is not always easy to find the money. This Clause does not give a contributory pension at all. It gives, as a free gift from the State, a pension to certain classes of persons, although nothing whatever has been paid by themselves, or by their employers, or their husband's employers, or their husbands in respect of the benefits which we are conferring. We have felt it right, and I think the Committee will unanimously support our view, that a grant of that kind should be given in certain cases. Obviously, when we are giving a free grant of that kind it is necessary very closely to limit the class who can claim it, and we have thought it right to limit it to that class whose economic condition more especially demands help, namely, the widow with young children whom she has to keep at home and who is debarred very largely from entering into the wage-earning class.
The same strength of argument does not apply in the case of the childless widow. In discussing the earlier Clauses, suggestions were made that the childless widow should be left out altogether. It would cost an enormous sum of money to include the widows referred to in this Amendment. The hon. Member's own estimate of the total number was 500,000. Our estimate came to approximately 600,000. It is impossible to frame any reliable estimate as to how many widows would come within the need pension provision, as we have no material on which to make a calculation, nor have we the machinery available to investigate and find out in
regard to each widow whether or not she could qualify for a need pension. While I entirely sympathise with the motives which induced my hon. Friend to put this Amendment on the Paper, the Government cannot, for the reasons which he himself has suggested, accept it.

Mr. HARRIS: I am sorry that, after making an overwhelming case for the Amendment, the hon. Member has not the courage to move it in a particular form or, alternatively, to find a form which would meet the hardship. Here you are going to have a serious anomaly. You will have sections of respectable, hard-working women who, through the accident of circumstances, are outside the scope of the Bill. The State has to be careful to prevent a sense of injustice among citizens. As the law is going to be, you will have one class, an equally deserving class, deprived of benefits which widows who are no more deserving will enjoy. If the Minister is not prepared because of the financial difficulty to accept this Amendment, he has an obligation to these people to try and draft some Clause that will meet their case and remove that sense of injustice which is inevitable if we pass the Bill in its present form.

Mr. J. HUDSON: It is a long time since we witnessed such a fumbling process as we have had this afternoon in connection with this Amendment. The Mover of the Amendment gave justifiable reasons for this step to be carried through. He knows that there are a large number of widows over the age of 50, especially in the present economic conditions, who are extremely hard hit. It does no good coming here to talk about these hard cases and then doing nothing further. We are told there is not the money. [An HON. MEMBER: "What about the cruisers?"] If it comes to a question of cruisers, you could find the money by dropping one cruiser.

The CHAIRMAN: This argument is outside the scope of the Debate.

Mr. HUDSON: One might say that if it were a question of finding the money, the hon. Member who moved the Amendment could see at once from the hint given to him by one of his own hon. Friends a way in
which this money could be found. What seems to be wrong is that hon. Gentlemen on the opposite side know the justice of the case that has been put forward and have the power to see that justice is done, but when the crux comes they fail entirely in their duty, and pretend that the full duty has been done by merely making a speech on a very serious issue. If the hon. Member is not prepared to take a stand on this matter, we propose to do so, and we hope that other hon. Members will go into the Division Lobby with us.

Rear - Admiral BEAMISH: I am delighted to retreat gracefully from this Amendment, to which my name is attached. It has served a very admirable lesson to hon. Members opposite, as showing what ought to be done when a thing is closely investigated. Instead of throwing away the nation's money we withdraw and live to fight another day for the people who are deserving.

Mr. BROAD: We have witnessed a remarkable performance, more appropriate to a skittle alley than to the House of Commons. You put up your dollies and then you knock them down. The Committee ought to be treated more seriously. It may be regarded as a smart piece of electioneering, but we are not on the electioneering platform to-day. I hope the Committee will see the justice of this claim. A very large proportion of these people will be a charge on the community, but not on the right section of the community; not on those who are receiving incomes on a scale subject to Super-tax. These widows have passed the prime of life and find it almost impossible to get employment. Most of them have to seek help from the Poor Law to get a living and have to try to eke out a miserable existence doing an odd day's charing, and we should recognise our responsibility to them. The Attorney-General said that we have no machinery for estimating these cases. We have already machinery for investigating the old age pensions. The Pensions Committee, which is a very suitable and experienced body, could investigate these cases. I hope that we shall go to a vote on this question and that the Committee will recognise our responsibility to these middle-aged and old women, who have done their duty to the community, and give them something in their old age.

Captain ARTHUR EVANS: I am very glad that the hon. Member for Reading (Mr. H. Williams) has brought forward this Amendment and pointed out the impossibility of giving effect to the numerous suggestions which come from the Socialist Benches and from the Liberal Benches. It is well to remember the general impossibility of numerous suggestions which show how the hon. Members endeavour to gain on the roundabouts as well as on the swings. They criticise us violently for what we have done and they say what they would have done, and—

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Member must deal with the Amendment.

Major HORE-BELISHA: An extraordinary argument has been used by the hon. and gallant Member who has just sat down. The Minister justifies this Clause on the ground that it gives effect to the non-contributory principle. What happens, then, to the argument of demoralisation and the stigma of charity? If you are going to apply the non-contributory principle, you should apply it in the case of an unfortunate class of people who never had a chance of paying contributions and who are a most deserving class. The Attorney-General says that women who have no young children to bring up should be given this 10s. a week and be abstracted from the labour market. This is an Amendment to bring in those who have brought up children and rendered service to the community and who are no longer able to work. They are not to get a single farthing. They will look on the opposition to this scheme with feelings of disgust and disappointment. It is intolerable that these women who have worked hard all their lives are not to get a farthing while you are to give a free gift to young widows with very much more money than these women have ever had to play with in their lives. If there is one class which has a greater sense of grievance than another it is this class of widows of from 55 to 65 who have brought up families and rendered service to the State and who are to be left destitute so far as this Bill is concerned. If you are going to draw distinctions you must bring forward some argument. No argument has been brought forward by the Attorney-General. What he says merely amounts to saying "we are giving
this as a free gift." That is not an argument that can be sustained, because if you give a free gift to a less deserving section of the community you must, if you are to have any regard to logic, give the same gift to the most deserving section of the community.

Miss WILKINSON: I think that this Amendment must have been moved as the result of a very large number of appealing letters which hon. Members on all sides of the House have been receiving for the last few weeks. My postbag has been full of appeals from women who say that they have slaved to bring up their children. Some of them have brought up children whom they expected to maintain them in their old age. The War and various chances of life have taken those children from them and they are now left destitute. Many of them are going to the Poor Law which they hate. Many of them are trying to struggle along without going to the Poor Law, and the point of all these letters is the same. "We have tried to hang on in the hope that something would be done for us." They saw in this Bill the possibility of something being done, but I am afraid that they are going to discover that Tory social reform is Dead Sea fruit indeed, and, so far as these women are concerned, it is going to turn fast to ashes in their mouths. But these women might at least have been spared the insult offered by the hon. Member for Beading in bringing forward the Amendment and then making such a speech as to defeat the Amendment before it was put before a Committee.
I suggest that that is electioneering of the worst description. It shows that even the hon. Member for Reading realises that something ought to have been done, but that at the back of his mind is the feeling that he must not give anything to the poor, but that it is sufficient to be able to say you have made a speech. I would suggest that speeches made in this House are not going to fill the empty pantries of these women who have struggled so far. The young able-bodied woman of 20 is to have a pension of 10s. a week when she has no children to bring up, but these women who have rendered service to the State, and have struggled along and worn themselves out in rendering that service so that they are no longer able to compete in the labour market, are to be told "we will give to the young
women but you can go to the Poor Law." I hope that this Amendment is; not going to be treated in the frivolous spirit in which it was moved. We are deadly serious about it and I hope that it will be pressed to a Division.

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: I do not think that I was particularly frivolous in moving the Amendment. I tried to be deadly serious and to point out its serious implication. It is easy to get up and make the kind of speech which, when it is reported, is likely to do you good, but I do not think that I stand to gain very much politically in explaining why I am

not supporting my own Amendment, and to charge me with electioneering on those grounds is utterly futile. I have explained to a great many of those who have communicated with me the difficulties of giving effect to what they desire, and I only hope that those who have seen fit to criticise me have been as honest with their correspondents as I have been with mine.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 126; Noes, 243.

Division No. 271.]
AYES.
[4.42 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hardle, George D.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Harney, E. A.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Harris, Percy A.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Ammon, Charles George
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Rose, Frank H.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hayday, Arthur
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Baker, Walter
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scrymgeour, E.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, G. H.
Sexton, James


Barnes, A.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Barr, J.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Batey, Joseph
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Broad, F. A.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Bromley, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Buchanan, G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Snell, Harry


Clowes, S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Cluse, W. S.
Kelly, W. T.
Stamford, T. W.


Clynes, Right Hon. John R.
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Compton, Joseph
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Connolly, M.
Kenyon, Barnet
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cove, W. G.
Kirkwood, D.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lawson, John James
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, F.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lindley, F. W.
Tinker, John Joseph


Day, Colonel Harry
Livingstone, A. M.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Dennison, R.
Lowth, T.
Viant, S. P.


Dunnico, H.
Lunn, William
Wallhead, Richard C.


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


England, Colonel A.
Mackinder, W.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer)
March, S.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Maxton, James
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Montague, Frederick
Westwood, J.


Gibbins, Joseph
Morris, R. H.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Gillett, George M.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Whiteley, W.


Gosling, Harry
Naylor, T. E.
Wiggins, William Martin


Greenall, T.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Owen, Major G.
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Groves, T.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Grundy, T. W.
Ponsonby, Arthur
Windsor, Walter


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Potts, John S.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hall, Fredk. (Yorks, Normanton)
Rees, Sir Beddoe



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Ritson, J.
Mr. Warne and Mr. Charles




Edwards.


NOES.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Brass, Captain W.


Alexander, E. E (Leyton)
Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Briggs, J. Harold


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Berry, Sir George
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Blades, Sir George Rowland
Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)


Astor, Viscountess
Blundell, F. N.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Boothby, R. J. G.
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James


Balniel, Lord
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Bullock, Captain M.


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan


Burman, J. B.
Haslam, Henry C.
Oakley, T.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hawke, John Anthony
Orsmby-Gore, Hon. William


Campbell, E. T.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Penny, Frederick George


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Pielou, D. P.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Pilcher, G.


Chapman, Sir S.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Charterls, Brigadier-General J.
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Preston, William


Christie, J. A.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Price, Major C. W. M.


Clarry, Reginald George
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Raine, W.


Clayton, G. C.
Holt, Capt. H. P.
Ramsden, E.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Homan, C. W. J.
Rentoul, G. S.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Cooper, A. Duff
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Cope, Major William
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Ropner, Major L.


Couper, J. B.
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Rye, F. G.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend)
Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Salmon, Major I.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Huntingfield, Lord
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hurst, Gerald B.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n& P'bl's)
Sandon, Lord


Dalkeith, Earl of
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Hoyton)
Jacob, A. E.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Sinclair, Col. T.(Queen's Univ., Belfast)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Jephcott, A. R.
Skelton, A. N.


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Dawson, Sir Philip
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Lamb, J. Q.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Dixey, A. C.
Lane-Fox, Colonel George R.
Smithers, Waldron


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Drewe, C.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Loder, J. de V.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Elveden, Viscount
Looker, Herbert William
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Lougher, L.
Stott, Lieut.-Colon I. W. H.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lowe, Sir Francis William
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Lumley, L. R.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Sugden, Sir Wilfred


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Fermoy, Lord
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Fleming, D. P.
McLean, Major A.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Ford, P. J.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Frece, Sir Walter de
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel
Waddington, R.


Ganzoni, Sir John
Making, Brigadier-General E.
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Malone, Major P. B.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Margesson, Captain D.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Goft, Sir Park
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Watts, Dr. T.


Gower, Sir Robert
Meller, R. J.
Wells, S. R.


Grace, John
Meyer, Sir Frank
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Grotrian, H. Brent
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hammersley, S. S.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Hanbury, C.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wolmer, Viscount


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Murchison, C. K.
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W. R., Ripon)


Harland, A.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Harrison, G. J. C.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Hartington, Marquess of
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)



Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Nuttall, Ellis
Captain Douglas Hacking and




Captain Viscount Curzon.

Mr. G. J. C. HARRISON: I beg to move, in page 18, line 6, at the end, to insert the words
or if the widow is without children and by reason of infirmity is unable to maintain herself.
I will not apologise to the House for seeking to help a category of people who,
I am sure, have the sympathy of all, and' of none more than of the right hon. Gentleman on the Front Bench. The case of these people requires no special pleading. I will give one reason only, though many could be given. The women whom I am seeking to relieve are mainly those who are in receipt of Poor Law
relief already. On the other hand, I know that there are others who, to avoid the stigma of Poor Law relief, are in an even more miserable condition. I know quite well that to ask for all existing widows to be dealt with under the Bill would upset entirely the actuarial basis of the Bill. Therefore I content myself with asking that infirmity should be made the sole reason for a widow's inclusion under my Amendment. If the right hon. Gentleman cannot accept the Amendment now, I hope that he will find some form of words that will meet the case on the Report stage.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: This Amendment has been considered by the Government and by those advising as to the finance of the scheme, and we are informed that it would be quite impossible for us to hold out any hope that we could accept the Amendment. The difficulties, so far as we are able to give them to the Committee, are these: There are in the population about 1,250,000 widows of all ages under 70, exclusive of war widows. Of these, it is expected that about 196,000 will receive pensions under Clause 18 as at present drawn. From the remainder one has to deduct those whose husbands have no insurance qualifications. That probably leaves about 600,000 widows. How many of those would be infirm we have no means of estimating, but they must be a considerable number. If they are insured persons they are presumably in receipt of disablement benefit. Of the remainder, if this Amendment were to add only 20,000 to the total pension Bill, the effect would be that in the 10 years during which the present provision is made of £4,000.000 a year, the scheme would be hopelessly bankrupt. The

position, therefore, is that the suggested plan would be extraordinarily difficult to administer. It would be necessary to have inquiries in every case as to whether or not every applicant was unable to maintain herself by reason of infirmity. Presumably, it would be necessary to have machinery under which, from time to time, we would have to ascertain whether that infirmity or disability had passed away, and the cost which would be thrown upon the Exchequer would be such as to make acceptance of the Amendment impossible. While we have every sympathy with the object that my hon. Friend has in view, I am sorry that we cannot promise him that we can accept his proposal.

Mr. HARRIS: I quite see the difficulties in the Amendment as it is worded, but would not the case be met if the word "permanent" were inserted before "infirmity"? One knows, in the administration of war pensions, that there are permanent disabilities which are recognised as incurable. It certainly does seem hard that a sick widow, unable to keep herself through illness, should be forced into a workhouse, while a young woman, owing to the fact that her husband came under the insurance scheme, would get the full benefit of this Bill. Could not the Government consider some form of words that would meet the case of the widow not now coming under the Act but suffering from permanent disability? These cases might well be treated in special terms. Therefore, I support the Amendment, with the alteration I have suggested.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 97; Noes, 189.

Division No. 272.]
AYES.
[4.56 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Dalton, Hugh
Harris, Percy A.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Day, Colonel Harry
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)


Ammon, Charles George
Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)


Attlee, Clement Richard
England, Colonel A.
Hirst, G. H.


Baker, Walter
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Gillett, George M.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Barnes, A.
Gosling, Harry
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)


Barr, J.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Batey, Joseph
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)


Bromley, J.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Kelly, W. T.


Buchanan, G.
Groves, T.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Charleton, H. C.
Grundy, T. W.
Kirkwood, D.


Cluse, W. S.
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Lawson, John James


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Lee, F.


Connolly, M.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Livingstone, A. M.


Cove, W. G.
Hardle, George D.
Lowth, T.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Harney, E. A.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)


March, S.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Westwood, J.


Montague, Frederick
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Whiteley, W.


Naylor, T. E.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Wiggins, William Martin


Oliver, George Harold
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Snell, Harry
Williams. David (Swansea, East)


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Potts, John S.
Stamford, T. W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Rees, Sir Beddoe
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)
Windsor, Walter


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Womersley, W. J.


Ritson, J.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Roberts, Rt. Hon. F.O.(W. Bromwich)
Tinker, John Joseph



Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.-


Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes, Stratford)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Warne.


Scrymgeour, E.
Wedgwood Rt. Hon. Josiah



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Murchison, C. K.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Goff, Sir Park
Nelson, Sir Frank


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Gower, Sir Robert
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Albery, Irving James
Grace, John
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld.)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E.)
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Nuttall, Ellis


Ashley, Lt.-Col Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Oakley, T.


Astor, Viscountess
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Orsmby-Gore, Hon. William


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Pennefather, Sir John


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Pielou, D. p.


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Hanbury, C.
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Harland, A.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Bennett, A. J.
Hartington, Marquess of
Preston, William


Berry, Sir George
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Raine, W.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Haslam, Henry C.
Ramsden, E.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Bourne, Captain Robert Crott
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxl'd, Henley)
Rentoul, G. S.


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Roberts, E. H. G. (Flint)


Brass, Captain W.
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Rye, F. G.


Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Bullock, Captain M.
Holt, Capt. H. P.
Sandon, Lord


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Human. C. W. J.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Burman, J. B.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Sinclair Col. T.(Queen's Univ., Belfast)


Campbell. E. T.
Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Smith. R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Huntingfield, Lord
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Spender Clay. Colonel H.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F. (Will'sden, E.)


Chapman, Sir S.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Stanley. Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Jacob, A. E.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Cochrane. Commander Hon. A. D.
Lamb, J. O.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Cooper, A. Duff
Lane-Fox, Colonel George R.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Cope. Major William
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Thompson. Luke (Sunderland)


Coupor, J. B.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Looker, Herbert William
Turton, Edmond Russborough


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Lougher, L.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Lowe, Sir Francis William
Wallace, Captain O. E.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lumley, L. R.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Watts, Dr. T.


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
McLean, Major A.
Wells, S. R.


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Dixey, A. C.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Drewe, C.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Wilson. Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Wilson. M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Elveden, Viscount
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Malone, Major P. B.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Everard, W. Lindsay
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wise, Sir Fredric


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Margesson, Captain D.
Wolmer, Viscount


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W. R., Ripon)


Fleming, D. P.
Meller, R. J.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark)
Worthington Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Frece, Sir Walter de
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.



Ganzoni, Sir John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Gates, Percy
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Major Sir Harry Barnston and


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Captain Viscount Curzon.


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive

Mr. HARRIS: I beg to move, in page 18, line 6, at the end, to insert the words
 or the age not exceeding sixteen up to which the child remains under full-time instruction in a day school.
I move this Amendment on behalf of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Central Hull (Lieut.-Commander Ken-worthy), and I rather gather the Amendment, which was accepted yesterday, will make this a natural sequel, because, obviously, if you are going to recognise the widows in one case, if they have children at school, by a special concession, then in this particular case it should be recognised also. It is obvious that the temptation to a woman to send her child out to work, when she is the sole bread-winner, must be very great, and it is to the interest of the State, where it is suitable that the child should continue its education, that every inducement should be held out to the mother, when she is a widow, to keep her child at school. I do hope, therefore, the Minister can see his way to accept the Amendment, because it would be a very generous concession to education, it would be much appreciated by the people concerned, and would be a move in the; right direction, recognising the principle that it is desirable that, where possible, children should stay at school up to the age of 16.

The ATTORNEY- GENERAL: This, again, I am sorry to say, is an Amendment the Government are not able to accept. The concession to which the hon. Member referred, presumably, was one that was made some days ago on Clause 1, when the Government agreed that it' a child remained at school until 16, the additional allowance should be paid in respect of that child during the extra two years at which it stayed at school. That provision is still intended to be continued, and is continued, by the opening words of Clause 18, which gives the pension
in the like circumstances and under the like conditions as if the husband, father, or mother, as the case may be, had died immediately after the commencement of this Act." 
But the addition of the words which the hon. Gentleman has moved would involve, not merely an additional allowance to be paid, as it will be by virtue of Clause 1, but if there were, for
example, a widow who had no children under 14, but had children at school, she would come in for her widow's pension, although not under the present qualification: It is obvious that that is not intended by the Government, and to make it quite clear that it is not intended, an Amendment at the end of paragraph (d) will be moved by my right hon. Friend in a few minutes to make it clear that is not the intention of the Clause. Our intention is that the widow's pension shall cease when the child is 14, and that the widow shall be qualified for this pension only if she has a child under 14 if she is qualified at the statutory date, and, if qualified, she will go on drawing full allowance in the same way as any other widow, but she will not become qualified merely by the fact that the child remains at school.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I hope very much the Government will reconsider this point. It is rather difficult to follow the exact difference between what has been proposed and what the Government say is, as a matter of fact, in the Bill. If I understand the Attorney-General rightly, the difference between the two concerns only an exceedingly small number of people. It is those widows who, in the present circumstances, have managed to keep their child or children at school after the age of 14. They have no children under 14 at the present time, but they have one or two children over 14 which, with great heroism, they have managed to keep at school, in spite of the fact that they get no pension at the present time. It is that exceedingly small class, if I understand it rightly, that the Government propose to exclude from the benefits of this Clause and I am quite sure I shall carry the Committee with me in my feeling that this is a quite unnecessary restriction. I say it is unnecessary, because the number of widows who at the present time have children over 14 at school must be exceedingly small, and to enable those women to get a children's allowance for the brief remainder of the term until they reach the age of 16 could only involve an exceedingly small addition to the expense of the Act. I think if there are any women who deserve praise and help, it is those heroic widows who, without any pension, have struggled to keep their children over 14 at school, and I do hope that, in this exceedingly
small number of cases the Government will see their way to make this additional allowance.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 123; Noes, 251.

Division No. 273.]
AYES.
[5.11 p.m.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hardie, George D.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Harney, E. A.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)


Ammon, Charles George
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hayday, Arthur
Rose, Frank H.


Baker, Walter
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Salter, Or. Alfred


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scrymgeour, E.


Barnes, A.
Hirst, G. H.
Sexton, James


Barr, J.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Batey, Joseph
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Broad, F. A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Bromley, J.
Hutchison. Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Buchanan, G.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Rennle (Penistone)


Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Snell, Harry


Clowes, S.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stamford, T. W.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kelly, W. T.
Stephen. Campbell


Compton, Joseph
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Connolly, M.
Kenyon, Barnet
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cove, W. G.
Kirkwood, D.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lawson, John James
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, F.
Tinker. John Joseph


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lindley, F. W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lowth, T.
Viant, S. P.


Dennison, R.
Lunn, William
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dunnico, H.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Warne, G. H.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Mackinder, W.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
March, S.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


England, Colonel A.
Maxton, James
Webb. Rt. Hon. Sidney


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Montague, Frederick
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Gibbins, Joseph
Morris, B. H.
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Morrison, R. C, (Tottenham, N.)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Gosling, Harry
Naylor, T. E.
Whiteley, W.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Oliver, George Harold
Wiggins. William Martin


Greenall, T.
Owen, Major G.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Groves, T.
Ponsonby, Arthur
Wilson R. J (Jarrow)


Grundy, T. W.
Potts, John S.
Windser, Walter


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr, Tydvil)
Ritson, J.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich)
Mr. Percy Harris and Mr.




Trevelyan Thomson.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Broun, Lindsay. Major H.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)


Albery, Irving James
Brown, Maj. D.C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Curzon, Captain Viscount


Allen, J, Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Dalkeith, Earl of


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Bullock, Captain M.
Davidson, J.(Kertt'd, Hemel Hempst'd)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Surman, J. B.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)


Astor, Viscountess
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Dawson, Sir Philip


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Campbell, E. T.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley


Balniel, Lord
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Dixey, A C.


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Drewe, C.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Edmondson Major A. J.


Beckett. Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Chapman, Sir S.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Elveden, viscount


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Christie, J. A.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)


Bennett, A. J.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)


Berry, Sir George
Clayton, G. C.
Everard, W. Lindsay


Blades. Sir George Rowland
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Fairfax, Captain J. G.


Blundell, F. N.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Cooper, A. Duff
Fermoy, Lord


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cope, Major William
Fleming, D, P,


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Couper, J. B.
Ford, P. J.


Brass, Captain W.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Briggs, J. Harold
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Foster, Sir Harry S.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Frece, Sir Walter de


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lamb, J. O.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Ganzoni, Sir John
Lane-Fox, Colonel George R.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Gates, Percy
Lister, Cunliffe., Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Salmon, Major I.


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Samuel, A M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Loder, J. de V.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Looker, Herbert William
Sandon, Lord


Goff, Sir Park
Lougher, L.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Gower, Sir Robert
Lowe, Sir Francis William
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Grace, John
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Simms, Or. John M. (Co. Down)


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Lumley, L. R.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)


Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H.(W'th's'w, E.)
Mac Andrew, Charles Glen
Skelton, A. N.


Gretton, Colonel John
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Slaney, Major p. Kenyon


Grotrian, H. Brent
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
McLean, Major A.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Smithers, Waldron


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R.(Eastbourne)
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Spender Clay, Colonel H.


Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Hammersley, S. S.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Hanbury, C.
Malone, Major P. B.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'cland)


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Harland, A.
Margesson, Capt. D.
Storry Deans, R.


Harrison, G. J. C.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Hartington, Marquess of
Melier, R. J.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Merriman, F. B.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Meyer, Sir Frank
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Haslam, Henry C.
Milne. J. S. Wardlaw-
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Hawke, John Anthony
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxl'd, Henley)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Thompson Luke (Sunderland)


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col K. P.


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Waddington R.


Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Murchison, C. K.
Ward, Lt. Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Holt. Capt. H. P.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Homan, C. W. J.
Nuttall, Ellis
Watts, Dr. T.


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Oakley, T.
Wells, S. R.


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster Mossley)
Pennefather, Sir John
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Penny, Frederick George
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Hudson, R. S. (Cumb'l'nd, Whiteh'n)
Pielou, D. P.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Hume-Williams, Sir W. Ellis
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Huntingfield, Lord
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Wise, Sir Fredric


Hurst, Gerald B.
Preston, William



Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n &P'bl's)
Price, Major C. W. M.
Wolmer, Viscount


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Raine, W.
Womersley, W. J.


Jackson, Lieut.-colonel Hon. F. S.
Rawlinson, Rt.. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W. R., Ripon)


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Jacob, A. E.
Rentoul, G. S.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.



Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Ropner, Major L.
Major Hennessy and Mr. F. C.




Thomson.

Lieut.-Colonel WATTS-MORGAN: I beg to move, in page 18, line 8, to leave out the word "six," and to insert instead thereof the word "twelve."
I do not think it necessary to say much in regard to this Amendment, except to point out that the cost, apparently, would nor amount to very much. Having already in the course of the previous Debates on this Measure decided on the question of the desirability of bringing widows and orphans into this scheme, I think it would be only gracious on our part to extend this period to 12 months. The period of six months is too short. Under the present provision, in six months after the child becomes 14
years of age, the widow ceases to have these allowances. I am not going to describe the circumstances, because they are well known, and I will only say that if a period of 12 months' grace were allowed, and if the payments were continued for 12 months instead of six months after the child has reached 14 years of age, it would be a very important matter indeed to the widows concerned. I therefore appeal to the Minister to accept this proposal.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: The hon. and gallant Member has moved his Amendment in a speech of exceptional and praiseworthy brevity, and I shall endeavour to follow his example. We all
agree that a reasonable time should be allowed after the child has reached the maximum statutory age of 14 years, in which the widow can find employment and adapt herself to the new conditions. The only question is: What period constitutes a reasonable time? The Government take the view that in six months the widow would have time to consider her position and adapt herself to the new circumstances. Whatever figure one takes, people will say that it should be. more, or that it should be less. We consider the figure of six months as reasonable.

Mr. ROBERT YOUNG: We are disappointed to hear the Attorney-General's statement. I do not think anyone would wish to reduce the period, and we think it ought to be extended. The widow's position in this matter is a very unfortunate one. The child has been going to school up to the age of 14, and it depends on circumstances whether it will be possible within six months' time, to find work for the child after leaving school. In the circumstances which are operating now, and which may be operating in the future, it will be very difficult to do so. It is just at that period also that large additional expense is imposed on the widow. The child on leaving school has to put aside school clothing, and requires a new outfit to go to work, and to ask the widow to meet those expenses out of the wage paid to the child for the first six months' work is a great hardship. I think the Minister recognises that the Amendment would not impose a greatly increased charge on the scheme. At all events, I would like to know what the Minister estimates the cost of this proposal to be. It would be a gracious thing on our part to recognise our responsibility, not only to the widow but to the child, by extending this period to 12 months.

Major HORE-BELISHA: I wish to adhere to the example of brevity set by the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Mover of the Amendment. I ask the Minister to consider the great and sudden change in the household income which will take place in these, cases. The household may have been drawing an income of 18s. to 20s. per week, and that may be changed to nothing at all within six months. In the present condition of the employment market that is going to
place the mother of a family in a difficult position, if she is to keep the home together. The Amendment asks for very little. I would like to see a widow in these circumstances placed in as fortunate a position as the widow who comes in it a later date, and being enabled to draw her pension for the rest of her life. The women whom the Amendment seeks to benefit have already one big grievance, and it is not right that they should be so suddenly deprived of the income which they are to receive under this provision. A period of 12 months is not too long to allow7 a widow in which to readjust her circumstances to the new position. She may desire to keep the children at school out of her own pocket, and we are giving her no encouragement to do so. At any rate she will desire to give them proper sustenance, and it is asking very little to ask for an extension of the period within which she can look round for the employment which she and the children have to find and which they ought not to have to find.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I wish to raise a point which may only concern Scotland, but which seems to have some importance in this connection. It seems to be generally assumed that the child will leave school on reaching the age of 14, and that the widow will have six months clear after that period in which to seek work for the boy or girl concerned. In Scotland, however, a child docs not leave school just when he or she has reached the age of 14. Very often a child is 14 years and four or five months before leaving school, because there are fixed school leaving dates in Scotland. In Glasgow I know one date is in May or June, and the next is in November. If a child is a few weeks under the age of 14 at one of these dates, he or she must remain at school until the second date comes round, and in many cases, as I say, a child may be several months over 14 before leaving school. In such cases the parent has not six months after the child leaving school; she has in reality only the period between the date of leaving school and the expiration of the six months' period after the child has reached the age of 14. I do not know if the English practice as to school leaving is the same, but I am sure the concession of 12 months in all the circumstances would not be too much.

Sir THOMAS DAVIES: I should like to support the hon. Member who has just spoken. The custom in England is the same—that is to say, when the child has reached the age of 14, it can. only leave school at the end of the school term following the 14th birthday, and it is possible for a child to be 14 years and four months before leaving school. In such a case the parent would only get a period of grace of two months after the child had left school. Possibly the Government cannot accept the suggestion to extend the period to 12 months, but I think they ought to make this concession —that the parent should have the allowance continued for six months after the date on which the child leaves school, that being the end of the school term following the child's 14th birthday. That would go a long way to meet the Mover of the Amendment, and if a proposal of that kind were put forward, I would be only too pleased to support it. At present you are penalising the parents by only giving two or three months' grace, because most children have to go for several months beyond the age of 14 before they can leave school.

Mr. RHYS DAVIES: I always understood that the definite intention in this matter was to provide that the widow should receive pension and allowances for six months after the child left school-Now it transpires that although that was the intention, the allowance will actually stop six months after the child has reached 14 years of age. Let me put a concrete case. A child reaches the age of 14 in the middle of January, and, according to the Regulations of the Board of Education, is not allowed to leave school until the end of the school term in June. That child for all practical purposes will be aged 14 years and six months when it leaves school, and, just at the point when the child leaves school, the allowances and pensions payable to the mother are automatically stopped. The Minister should be able to find some means of providing that, instead of stopping the pension and allowances six months after the child's fourteenth birthday, the period should be fixed at six months after the child has left school. That would meet the point of the Amendment in some degree. At the same time I think the Amendment,
if carried, would cover all cases in the way we desire.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: There was one remark that fell from the Attorney-General, of the significance of which I was not quite clear. In the begining of his speech he said that this expiration of six months would be from the date that the child was 14. [Interruption.] I understand that when he made that remark he was anticipating the Amendment that his right hon. Friend was going to move, and I shall make my remarks when that opportunity arises.

Mr. FISHER: I hope the Minister will reconsider this provision. It appears to me that it must have been drafted under the assumption that the school age ceased at 14 for every child, but, as has already been pointed out, under the provisions of the Education Act, 1921, the child leaves school at the end of the term within which he or she has reached his or her fourteenth year. Parents entertain a very widespread objection to that particular provision of the Act. They say it acts unequally as between child and child, and the reason why that provision was inserted, first of all in the Education Act, 1918, and then in the Consolidating Act of 1921, was that on all sides we heard from the teaching profession that it was quite impossible to organise the education of the children in the upper standards of school if they were leaving all through the term, and that it was very important from an educational point of view that children should leave only at the end of a term.
That is the reason for the provision. Now I think that, if the Minister adheres to the provision in the form in which it now appears, that grievance will still continue. On the other hand, assuming that he accepts the suggestion which has been thrown out that the widow should continue in possession of the allowance until six months after her child has left school, that, I think, would do a great deal to remedy what is at present a sense of grievance. It would afford the widow a sufficient interval within which to adjust herself to her new position, and would altogether be a more equitable provision than that which appears on the face of the Bill.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: I wish to say a word in support of the suggestion of the
hon. Member for Cirencester (Sir T. Davies), which has been supported by the right hon. Member for the English Universities (Mr. Fisher). There has been a great deal of discontent among parents because of the recent provision that children should stay at school until the end of the term in which they are fourteen, and that discontent will revive if the Minister does not accept the proposal that has been made to him. I think probably the intention of the Minister was that there should be six months clear after the child leaves school, and I hope he will grant that concession.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD: I want to try to see exactly where we are in this matter. Clause 18 relates to widows who are not insured, but for Clause 18 itself, a certain category of widows and orphans whose husbands or parents died before the commencement of the Act. It is a wasting category. Every month that passes means that the category gets smaller and smaller. The child of the insured widow and the orphan who comes under the general provisions of this Bill is going to receive benefit up to 16 if he attends a day school, but, so far as this special category is concerned, the orphan will not receive any benefit beyond the age of 14, though the parent gets her pension for six months after that. That is where the Attorney-General's statement has led me into a little bit of confusion perhaps. The whole point at issue is that this specially pensioned widow should be treated, as regards her child who is at school after the age of 14, in the same way, at any rate while he is at school, as the widow under Clause 1, and that the orphan should be treated in the same way as the orphan dealt with in Clause 1, and I would appeal to the Government to take that matter into further consideration.
I only make one observation. There is this point that has not been made, I think. As soon as this Bill comes into operation, how unfair it will be if you get a number of children at school whose parents died when they were complete beneficiaries under this Bill and a number of children whose parents died before being complete beneficiaries under the Bill. They will be placed in a substantially different position, and as it is a wasting cost, why should you not put
them all in? Those of us who are very much in that position ourselves know what it means to people who are scraping and saving and striving to give their children a continued education, and this would be a tremendously good benefit for them. I think the Amendment should be accepted, if it cost, say, £2,000, especially when it is not a continuing annual charge.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The right hon. Member for Aberavon (Mr. Mac-Donald) says he desires to know where we are, and I am not surprised at his expression of that desire, because what we have been doing is to discuss a number of proposals which are not contained in the Amendment we are supposed to be discussing. If I may repeat for a moment what the right hon. Gentleman described as the whole point at issue in this discussion, it was this: He said that the children of those who come under Clause 1 of the Bill will have allowances paid in respect of them up to the age of 16 if they remain at school during that period, and he said that under this proposal the children of widows whose husbands died before the Act will have their allowances stopped at the age of 14. That is a misapprehension on the part of the right hon. Gentleman. If he will look at the beginning of the Clause, he will see that a widow's pensions shall be payable to the widow of a man who died before the commencement of this Bill, in the like circumstances and under the like conditions as if be had died after the commencement of the Act. The effect of that, therefore, is that precisely the same provision applies to the children of widows or to orphans, so far as connection between allowances and time at school is concerned, in this Clause as we have already provided in Clause 1. So much for that point and that meets the point made out by various hon. and right hon. Members opposite about the difference between the age of 14 and the actual time of leaving school. If they remain at school a few month longer after they have reached the age of 14, allowances are continued just the same under the alteration that has been made in Clause 1.
The real Amendment, we are discussing is with regard to the period after the allowances have ceased, during which
the widow shall continue to receive her own pension, that is, the widow whose husband never made any contribution under the scheme, and the difference between the case of a widow with dependant children whose husband died before the Bill operates and a widow whose husband died after is that, in the case of the latter, the widow has the pension for the rest of her life, unless she remarries. The point of the Amendment is that that pension should be continued six months after the child has ceased to receive an allowance, that is to say, that if the child were to remain at school for another two years till the age of 16, and thereby drew allowances for himself, the widow's pension should also be prolonged by the same period of two years That means that in the case of the children who remained at school under Clause 1 the widow would get an allowance of 5s. in the case of the eldest child and 3s. in the case of any other child for another two years, but in the case of the widow of the man who died before the Act, she would get an additional allowance of 15s., namely, 10s. for herself and 5s. for the child, for that period of two years, so that we should not be putting the two eases on a par. We should be giving a far more substantial bonus, if I may put it that way, to the widow of the man who died before the Bill comes into operation, and who did not contribute under the Bill, than we are giving to the widow of the man who has paid his contributions. That does not seem to us to be right, quite apart from the financial consideration, and. therefore, while we are giving this extra allowance in the case of children who are kept at school, we are not also giving extra pension to the mothers of those children.
There only remains the question of the actual extension of the widows' pensions, whether it should be six or 12 months. That is one of those considerations which we really have to take into account. The hon. Member asked what would be the extra cost of prolonging this widow's pension from six months to 12 months. I am advised that it would be £600,000 in the first 10 years, and I have not got that margin. The right hon. Member for Aberavon said it is not a permanent thing. It rises, and then falls. I have made a number of concessions in the
course of the Committee stage of the Bill, and they have exhausted any possibility of my accepting an Amendment of this kind. Hon. Members cannot have everything. They have to make a choice, and while, personally, I should be glad to see this period prolonged, I am debarred from prolonging it simply by the fact that we have not got the money available.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: May I put the position to the Minister in this way: The insured person gets the benefit of the child allowance up to the age of 16 if the child remains at school, and the mother also gets the pension all her life. That is in the case of an insured person. This Clause deals with the case of the person who is not insured, the case of the husband already dead before the Bill comes into operation. There are three separate types of people to consider. There is the case of the children under 14. They are in the Bill already. There is a child allowance there, and the mother is given the 10s. during that period and for six months afterwards. That is in the Bill. By the alteration that has been made the insured persons' child allowance is continued after the age of 14 and up to the age of 16 if the child remains at school; this in the case of those children who are under 14 after the Act commences. By the Amendment defeated a little while back that extension is not further extended in the case of the children already over 14 and who are still at school; the Minister has refused to extend the provision to that case. What we are considering in this Amendment, and in the Amendment to follow by the Minister, is the case of the woman whose children are under 14 when the Bill comes into force, who thereupon draws her own pension of 10s., and draws, in addition, the child allowance up to 14 if the children are at school. The question then comes as to what happens to that other child who leaves at 14. In this ease the child allowance will be continued up to the age of 16 if the child remains at school; but the right hon. Gentleman proposes not to allow the mother's own 10s. for the same period.
If the proposal of the Minister is carried into effect you will have the child of 13 to-day entitled to the child allowance of 5s. and the mother entitled to the mother's pension of 10s.; that con-
tinues until six months after the child reaches 14. If the child is then at school, and continues at school, the child's allowance will still continue to be paid, but the mother's pension of 10s. will stop. Therefore, these widows who are keeping the children at school will get the child allowance of 5s. but cease to draw their own pension of 10s. The Minister defends that by saying that otherwise these widows would get 15s. more than they would if he had not made the provision about keeping the children at school. I suggest to him that it is perfectly right that they should be getting 15s. more, because if a widow is keeping her child at school, and thereby foregoing the earnings of the child, 5s, per week is utterly inadequate for the purpose. That is the whole position of the Bill. The whole object of the Bill is to pay the widow of young children not merely the child allowance but the child allowance plus the pension of the widow herself, because, unless we do that the amount in this Bill not merely is inadequate but utterly contemptible.
No one can imagine that a widow can possibly look after one or two children

merely on the child allowance. Therefore, I do put it to the Minister that unless he can give the mother herself 10s. it is practically useless for him to give this allowance for the children, because the widow with one child cannot afford to keep that child on merely the child allowance. She can only do so if she gets 10s. for herself as well. As a matter of fact, there is this tremendous difference between the insured widow and the uninsured widow who comes in under this Clause: in the one case this allowance of pensions for women is given for the whole of their lives, and in the other case they cannot, in any case, get them for more than two years. I do put it to the Minister, if the advantage to the widow of the child allowance is to be any use to her at all, that he should meet us by extending also the allowance for the woman. I would ask him not to move the Amendment following this one as it stands in his name, because, in that case, we are not really enabling the widow to keep her children at school.

Question put, "That the word 'six' stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes. 261; Noes, 130.

Division No. 274.]
AYES
[5.55 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Burman, J. B.
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Drewe, C


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Edmonson, Major A. J. 


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, w. Derby)
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Elliot, Captain Walter E. 


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Caine, Gordon Hall
Elveden, Viscount


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Campbell, E. T.
England, Colonel A. 


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Cautley. Sir Henry S.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.) 


Astor, Viscountess
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Everard, W. Lindsay


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Fairfax, Captain J. G. 


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Falle, Sir Bertram G. 


Balniel, Lord
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Fermoy, Lord


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fielden, E. B. 


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Fleming, D. P. 


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Chapman, Sir S
Ford, P. J. 


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L. 


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Christie, J. A.
Foster, Sir Harry S. 


Benn, sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Clarry, Reginald George
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis F. 


Bennett, A. J.
Clayton, G. C.
Galbraith, J. F. w. 


Berry, Sir George
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Ganzoni, Sir John


Bethell, A.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Gates, Percy


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Cooper, A. Duff
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Cope. Major William
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham


Blundell, F. N.
Couper, J. B.
Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John


Boothby, R. J. G.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Goff, Sir Park


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Gower, sir Robert


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Grace, John


Brass, Captain W.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H.(W'th's'w, E) 


Briggs, J. Harold
Cunliffe. Joseph Herbert
Gretton, Colonel John


Brocklebank. C. E. R.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Grotrian, H. Brent


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Gunston, Captain D. W. 


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H. 


Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne) 


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hall, Cast. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.) 


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hammersley, S. S. 


Bullock, Captain M.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hanbury. C. 


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Dixey, A. C.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Harland, A.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Savery, S. S.


Harrison, G. J. C.
McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Shaw, Lt. Col. A. D. Mol. (Renfrew, W.)


Hartington, Marquess of
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Shaw, Capt, W. W. (Wilts, Westh'y)


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Makins, Brigadler-General E.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfst)


Haslam, Henry C.
Malone, Major P. B.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Hawke, John Anthony
Margesson, Captain D.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M..
Marriott, Sir I. A. R.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Meller, R. J.
Smithers Waldron


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Merriman, F. B.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Meyer, Sir Frank.
Spender Clay, Colonel H.


Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Mitchell, S. (Lanark)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Storry Deans, R.


Holl, Capt. H. P.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Homan, C. W. J.
Morrison, H. (Wills, Salisbury)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Murchison, C. K.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sykes, Major-Gen, Sir Frederick H.


Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Nuttall, Ellis
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Oakley, T.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


Huntingfield, Lord
Orsmby-Gore, Hon. William
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Hurst, Gerald B.
Pennefather, Sir John
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Penny, Frederick George
Waddington, R.


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Ward, Lt. Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Phillpson, Mabel
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Jacob, A. E.
Pielou, D. P.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Pilcher, G.
Watts, Dr. T.


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Wells, S. R.


Kindersley, Major G. M.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Preston, William
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Price, Major C. W. M.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Lamb, J. O.
Raine, W.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Lane-Fox, Colonel George R.
Rawilnson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk, Peel
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Wilson, M. J. (York, N. R., Richm'd)


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Rentoul, G. S.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Loder, J. de V.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Looker, Herbert William
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Lougher, L.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Ropner, Major L.
Wolmer, Viscount


Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W. R., Ripon)


Lumley, L. R.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Macandrew, Charles Glen
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Sandeman, A. Stewart



McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Augus
Sandon, Lord
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Mclean, Major A.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Major Sir Harry Barnston and




Major Hennessy.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Ammon, Charles George
Gibbins, Joseph
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Gillett, George M.
Kelly, W. T.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Gosling, Harry
Kennedy, T.


Baker, Walter
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Kirkwood, D.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Greenall, T.
Lawson, John James


Barr, J.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Lee, F.


Batey, Joseph
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lindley, F. W.


Broad, F. A.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Livingstone, A. M.


Bromley, J.
Groves, T.
Lowth, T.


Buchanan, G.
Grundy, T. W.
Lunn, William


Charieton, H. C.
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)


Clowes, S.
Hall, Fredik, (Yorks, Normanton)
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)


Cluse, W. S.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mackinder, W.


Clynes, Right Hon. John R.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)


Compton, Joseph
Hardie, George D.
March, S.


Connolly, M.
Harney, E. A.
Maxton, James


Cove, W. G.
Harris, Percy A.
Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Montague, Frederick


Dalton, Hugh
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Morris, R. H.


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Hayday, Arthur
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Naylor, T. E.


Day, Colonel Harry
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Oliver, George Harold


Dennison, R.
Hirst, G. H.
Owen, Major G.


Duncan, C.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Dunnico, H.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bdewellty)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Ponsonby, Arthur




Potts, John S.
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Ritson, J.
Snell, Harry
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Roberts, Frederick O. (W. Bromwich)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
Stamford, T. W.
Westwood, J.


Robinson, W, C, (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Stephen, Campbell
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Rose, Frank H.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Whiteley, W.


Saklatvala, Shapurji
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Scrymgeour, E.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)
Williams. David (Swansea, East)


Sexton, James
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Thurtle, E.
Windsor, Walter


Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Tinker, John Joseph
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)
Trovelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.



Sitch, Charles, H.
Viant, S. P.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Warne and Mr. A. Barnes.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 18, line 10, at the end, to insert the words
or on which the youngest child attains the age of fourteen, whichever is the earlier.

This Amendment was discussed on the last Amendment, and therefore I will content myself with formally moving it.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 271; Noes, 131.

Division No. 275.]
AYES.
[6.3 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Christie, J. A.
Grace, John


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Clarry, Reginald George
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Clayton, G. C.
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H.(W'th's'w, E.)


Alexander, Sir Wm, (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gretton, Colonel John


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W, Derby)
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Grotrian, H. Brent


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cooper, A. Duff
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Couper, J. B.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)


Astor, Viscountess
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hall. Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hammersley, S. S.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Balniel, Lord
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Harland, A.


Banks, Reginald Mitchell
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Hartington, Marquess of


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N
Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Heslam, Henry C.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Hawke, John Anthony


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Berry, Sir George
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Bethell, A.
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Henderson, Limit.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Dawson, Sir Philip
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Blundell, F. N.
Dixey, A. C.
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Drewe, C.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Brass, Captain W.
Elveden, Viscount
Holt, Capt. H. P.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
England, Colonel A.
Homan, C. W. J.


Briggs, J. Harold
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel S. N.


Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd, Hexham)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Howard, Capt. Hon. D (Cumb., N.)


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Fermoy Lord
Hudson, R. S, (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)


Bullock, Captain M.
Fielden, E. B.
Huntingfield, Lord


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Fleming, D. P.
Hurst, Gerald B.


Burman, J. B.
Ford, P. J.
Hutchison,G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Forrest, W.
Jackson Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Caine, Gordon Hall
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Jacob, A. E.


Campbell, E. T.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Ganzoni, Sir John
Kindersley. Major Guy M.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Gates, Percy
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Lamb, J. O.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Lane-Fox, Colonel George R.


Chapman, Sir S.
Goff, Sir Park
Lister, Cunliffe, Rt. Hon. Sir Phillip


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Gower, Sir Robert
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Loder, J. de V.
Phillpson, Mabel
Storry Deans, R.


Looker, Herbert William
Pielou, D. P.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Lougher, L.
Pilcher, G.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Lows, Sir Francis William
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Lumley, L. R.
Preston, William
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Price, Major C. W. M.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Macdonald, R, (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Raine, W.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Rawilnson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk, Peel
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell-


McLean, Major A.
Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Rentoul, G. S.
Waddington, R.


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Rice, Sir Frederick
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Roberts, Samuel (Herelord, Hereford)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes, Stretford)
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Ropner, Major L.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Meller, R. J.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Watts, Dr. T.


Merriman, F. B.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wells, S. R.


Meyer, Sir Frank
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Sandeman, A. Stewart
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Sandon, Lord
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon B. M.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Savery, S. S.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mol. (Renfrew, W.)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Murchison, C. K.
Skelton, A. N.
Wolmer, Viscount


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Womersley, W. J.


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n& Kinc'dine, C.)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Wood, Rt. Hon. E.(York, W. R., Ripon)]


Nuttall, Ellis
Smithers, Waldron
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Oakley, T.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Spender Clay, Colonel H.
Wragg, Herbert


Pennefather, Sir John
Sprot, Sir Alexander



Penny, Frederick George
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.-


Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain




Margesson.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Ammon, Charles George
Hardie, George D.
Potts, John s.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Harney, E. A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le Spring)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Harris, Percy A.
Ritson, J.


Baker, Walter
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Barnes, A.
Hayday, Arthur
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Barr, J.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Rose, Frank H.


Batey, Joseph
Hirst, G. H.
Saklatvala, Shapurji


Broad, F. A.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Scrymgeour, E.


Bromley, J.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Sexton, James


Buchanan, G.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Charleton, H. C.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Clowes, S.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Short, Alfred (Wednesday)


Cluse, W. S.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sitch, Charles H.


Compton, Joseph
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, H. S. Lees- (Keighley)


Connolly, M.
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Cove, W. G.
Kennedy, T.
Snell, Harry


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kirkwood, D.
Snowden, rt. Hon. Philip


Dalton, Hugh
Lawson, John James.
Stamford, T. W.


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Lee, F.
Stephen, Campbell


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lindley, F. W.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Day, Colonel Harry
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Dennison, R.
Lowth, T.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Duncan, C.
Lunn, William
Thorns, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dunnico, H.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Macdonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Thurtle, E.


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Mackinder, W.
Tinker, John Joseph


Gibbins, Joseph
McLean, Major A.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Gillett, George M.
March, S.
Vlant, S. P.


Gosling, Harry
Maxton, James
Wallhead, Richard C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred
Warne, G. H.


Greenall, T.
Montague, Frederick
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Morris, R. H.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Groves, T.
Maylor, T. E.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Westwood, J.


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Owen, Major G.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.




Whiteley, W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Wiggins, William Martin
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. T.


Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Windsor, Walter
Henderson.


Williams, David (Swansea, E.)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)



Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Mr. T. THOMSON: I beg to move, in page 18, line 21, at the end, to add the words
(f) of the above-mentioned statutory conditions (a) and (b) shall be deemed to have been complied with if it can be shown to the satisfaction of the Minister that the total income of husband and wife at the time of the death of the widow's husband (where the claim is for a widow's pension) or orphan child's father (where the claim is for an orphan's pension) did not exceed two hundred and fifty pounds per annum.
We have spent considerable time in trying to remove some of the anomalies which will arise under the Clause as it stands at present, but, unfortunately, first one attempt and then another has been turned down by the Government. I submit that whatever objections they may raise to this particular Amendment it cannot be objected to on the ground of administrative difficulties, because it will make a clean cut and remove many of the anomalies which are found in the Clause at present. It provides in the case of existing widows and orphans that where the combined income does not exceed £250 a year they should be qualified for pensions. That, undoubtedly, will bring in a considerable number more than would come under the Clause as it stands, and that is the intention. The Clause as it stands is not based on the contributory system, because all who come in do so irrespective of any contributions that have been made to this particular scheme.
I submit that if we have a Widows' and Orphans' Pensions Bill we ought to bring in all the widows and orphans in existence at present. Various anomalies and injustices have been referred to, and I do not wish to waste time in repeating them, but just to make one protest against a cheeseparing policy which cuts out so many deserving cases. In our experience of the working of the Persions Warrant and of the Unemployment Insurance Act we know that anomalies continually arise, and when we are legislating afresh we ought to seek to avoid creating fresh anomalies and fresh difficulties. I submit that this Amendment, which provides a clear-cut test, gets over many of the difficulties which have been referred to this afternoon. With regard to the ques-
tion of cost, these widows and orphans have to be kept at the present time, and therefore it is merely a question of transferring the burden, and whether we are to pay out of rates or the Exchequer, or out of these pensions. When rates are so high, it will only be a fair adjustment of burdens to take this responsibility off the shoulders of the local ratepayers and put it upon the shoulders of the taxpayer and upon this Bill.

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): I am afraid I must make the same answer to this suggestion as has been made to many others. There are, of course, administrative difficulties in connection with this Clause. The Minister of Health will have to be satisfied about the income limit in all these cases, which will necessitate a good many inquiries in order to elucidate the facts. But the real reason why we cannot accept this Amendment, and so bring into the scheme every kind of person one could conceivably think of, is because of the cost. The hon. Member stated that a considerable number more people would be brought within the Bill as the result of his proposal. The Minister of Health has already told the Committee that we have no margin left, and we have unfortunately exhausted all the money we allotted to this Bill On that ground, I ask the Committee to reject this Amendment.

Amendment negatived.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Mr. LEES-SMITH: There has been, I think, adequate discussion on every point that was raised in the Amendments with the exception of one, and in this case, I think, the Minister of Health will recognise that the Debate suddenly collapsed, because we had not understood the reply that was given. It is a very small point, and we should like it made clear as to whether we understand the position correctly. The point was this. We are now dealing with women whose husbands have already died, and who are widows. The Clause allows widows to
have an extension of the children's allowance, if the children are at school, up to the age of 16, and that applies to this class of widows as well as those who become so in the future. I think we are right in understanding that if a widow in this class has a child now, say, of 13½ years of age or 13¾, and she sends that child to school up to the age of 16, that widow will not receive her 10s., but she will receive 5s. on behalf of the child. Is the position that if the widow who has a child of 14 years and one day without any pension or assistance and she has made sacrifices in order to send that child to school, that although that child remains at school up to the age of 16 the widow is not going to get the 5s. allowance?
I understand that is still the case. This is surely very harsh, and it will cost very little to remedy it, because the number affected will be small and of course the whole problem will pass away in two years. This class of widow is really to be reckoned among the most heroic sections of the nation, and many Members of this House are here because their mothers who were widows, and in spite of other disadvantages of life, sacrificed themselves in order to send their children to school. That seems to be the usual way to begin a great career. Here you are picking out the class who have made this sacrifice, and you are distinguishing between them and everybody else. There is no justice in it, and it cannot be argued seriously on the ground of finance, because there are so few of them. For these reasons, I would like the right hon. Gentleman to explain why he has made this differentiation, and I ask him to consider whether a smaller sum could not be added for this purpose.

Sir JOHN MARRIOTT: I feel constrained to interpose only two or three sentences before this Clause is added to the Bill. Having followed the discussion very closely, I cannot agree that it is the benevolence of the Government rather than the malevolence or the hard-hearted-ness of the Committee that has landed us into the unfortunate, embarrassing and humiliating position in which we find ourselves this afternoon. The majority of the Committee have been giving their votes on Amendment after Amendment this afternoon which many of us feel we
shall find exceedingly difficult logically to justify. I feel that very strongly myself for a reason which may not perhaps commend itself to hon. Members opposite. The whole of Clause 18 really is in itself an excrescence on the Bill. The Clause really strikes at the root of the principle on which the whole Bill is founded, that is the principle of contribution, and that is the basic foundation of the whole Bill, Therefore, this Clause is an excrescence upon it, and once you have got away from that principle you are bound to open the door to a series of Amendments such as those we have been discussing this afternoon and of which I am afraid we may possibly hear more in the future.
It has been really impossible, so at least it has seemed to me, to find any reason or any logical line of division between the exceptions which the Government themselves have admitted in the Clause, and those which they have called upon the Committee to reject. If there is any such logic in it I have been unable to perceive it, and perhaps I may respectfully suggest to the Minister that he would to a considerable extent ease the consciences of those hon. Members on this side of the Committee who have given to him a loyal if not quite a logical support, if he would explain the principle on which he has acted both in respect of inclusion in and exclusion from this Clause.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I do not wish to go over the ground that has been already traversed, but I want to ask the Minister to suppose the case of a widow who, when the Act comes into operation, has two children, one under 14 and the ether over 14. The child over 14 is still at school. I understand that because this woman has one child under 14 she comes under the provisions of Clause 18, and because the other child is over 14 she will get the child's allowance on behalf of both children. If that be so, perhaps the Minister will answer the point. I think the right hon. Gentleman will see that that restricts the number of cases which he has excluded under this Bill to a very small number; in fact, it is so small that I hope his heart will melt between now and the Report stage, and that he will be able to see his way to consider this very small number of people whose educational opportunities it seems quite unnecessary
not to facilitate in the way which is proposed.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The logic of my hon. Friend the Member for York (Sir J. Marriott) is sometimes irresistible, and I must plead guilty to the accusation which he has made. This Clause is not founded upon the general principle upon which the rest of the Bill has been constructed. But if it will ease his wounded conscience, I will try and do so by pleading in the words of a well-known classical work that the Clause is only a little one. It is quite true that hon. Members have found a case which, compared with those on the border-line, seems to be unjust. Really, I do deprecate these accusations of injustice when you remember that in many cases we are making a free gift to which none of the relations of these women have paid one penny, and therefore there can be no grievance; in fact, they should be extremely grateful that they have got anything.
The only motive which has caused us to grant these benefits to those who have not paid the contributions is because we felt-that there were dependent children, and we might argue that the State has some interest in the bringing up of those children under the best possible circumstances. It was with the children in mind rather than the widows that we made these proposals, and that is why the widow's allowance comes to an end. With regard to the conundrum put to me by the hon. Member for West Leicester (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence), I have fortified my own opinion by consultation, and I am informed that the hon. Member is quite right, and the provision allows them to be paid in respect of those children.

CLAUSE 19.—(Pensions of widows and orphans of men over seventy at commencement of Act.)

Amendment made:

In page 18, line 37, at the end, insert the words:
or on which the youngest child attains the age of fourteen, whichever is the earlier."—(Mr. Chamberlain.)

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 20.—(Persons over seventy entitled to old age pensions.)

Mr. BARKER: I beg to move, in page 19, line 6, to leave out the words "second day of July," and to insert instead thereof the words "fourth day of January."
This Clause confers upon an old age pensioner a pension irrespective of his income, and, as far as the principle of the Clause is concerned, it has the support of the party to which I belong. In fact, we are so enamoured of the virtues of this Clause that we want the Minister to bring it into operation six months earlier than is provided in the Bill as it stands at present. That is the only point that there is in this Amendment, and I hope it will commend itself to the Minister, and that he will make this concession.

Sir K. WOOD: I feel sure the whole Committee would like, if possible, to expedite these payments as the hon. Gentleman desires. There are, however, two reasons, one administrative and one financial, why it cannot be done. The Committee will remember that the payment to existing widows is to begin on the 4th January, 1926, and it was arranged, and is suggested in the Bill, that the payment to old age pensioners should begin on the 2nd July, 1926. One of the reasons for that is that, of course, the administrative machine which will have to work this scheme will undoubtedly be very much taxed during the next few months. A good many hon. Members have said to me, "When you have passed this Bill, will everything be right, and have you taken every step that can possibly be taken to see that the provisions, especially with regard to payment, will be duly carried out?" Undoubtedly, it will be a very big undertaking, but I am glad to think that such steps as can be taken are already in contemplation. It does, however, obviously involve a division of the work, and, if all these payments had to begin as the hon. Gentleman suggests, the machine undoubtedly would be strained very much indeed, if it did not break down altogether, because the difficulty of the task of ascertaining the widows and old age pensioners who will be entitled to these free gifts will, of course, be very considerable indeed. We hope to have the assistance of approved societies, of
Members of the House of Commons and of everyone else, in order that we may ascertain the people who are entitled and have been able to qualify, and I have no doubt that we shall receive that help.
The second reason why we cannot accept this Amendment is that it would, in fact, add a considerable financial burden to the scheme. The Actuary advises that in the first year it would mean a payment of another £600,000, and in the following year a payment of a similar amount—in all a payment of £1,200,000. I need not, this afternoon, further dilate on those figures and the consequences which would follow if we had to make a further payment of that kind. It would be impossible on financial grounds also, and, much as we should like to expedite the payment, I cannot advise the Committee to accept the Amendment.

Mr. R. DAVIES: The hon. Gentleman, in reply to the Mover of this Amendment, has used two arguments, and I am a little surprised that he thinks we shall be convinced by either. In the first place, he declares that the administrative machine will not stand the investigation in respect of these individuals. He knows well, and the Minister knows also, that the investigation with respect to the persons covered by this Clause will be very much easier than the investigation with respect to the widows and their children who will come under Clause 1. He then proceeds to use his second argument, and, if I might respectfully say so, I think it is the second argument that counts first with him. It is the financial argument. There is no argument at all against this Amendment except that the hon. Gentleman is afraid to spend money to provide these pensions under Clause 20. He says that the actuary says so. The actuary says this, and the actuary says that, but, if I understand anything at all about the actuary's work, he provides an argument just in the way that the Government desire. I take it that if I were to go to any actuary and tell him it was desired to spend not more than £10,000,000 next year and £15,000,000 the following year, the actuary would provide mo with exactly the arguments that I desired to support my case.

Sir K. WOOD: That would be your own Welsh actuary.

Mr. DAVIES: As a matter of fact, financial considerations are never based upon national tendencies. I have heard the same arguments coming from Scotsmen, Englishmen, and Irishmen, and, in fact, from some Welshmen, but not from these benches. I think it can be said quite confidently that the hon. Gentleman has not made out a case on the administrative point, and his whole case rests upon the cost. Surely, it must be obvious to him that he is deceiving and deluding old people when he brings forward a Bill on these lines, and then provides in this Clause that the pension shall not be payable to them at all until six months after the Act conies into operation. All the speeches that have been delivered by Government Representatives would lead the old people to think the pension is payable in January next, and now we are told that it is impossible because of administrative difficulties. I feel sure that my hon. Friends behind me will go into the Division Lobby on this issue. Of all the deserving cases that have been mentioned in connection with this Bill, I venture to say this is the most deserving of all. We on these benches are pledged, and hon. Members opposite also, that the age of 70 ought to be reduced to 65. That provision is made in this Bill. Then we say we have a splendid argument against waiting till July, because, if widows and their children can come under this Bill in respect of the insurance in past years of the husband and father, surely these people, who are qualified by the payment of contributions, ought to come under the scheme at once. I trust, therefore, that, as the Parliamentary Secretary has not been able to give us a better answer, the Minister will try his hand.

Mr. STEPHEN: I would like to ask the Minister to reconsider his decision in this matter. I am quite aware that there may be some financial difficulties, and that the Government have to go somewhat carefully, but, at the same time, I would like to put it to the Minister that, if he is prepared to weigh the comparative advantages that will accrue to the old age pensioners. these advantages should outweigh any difficulties that might accrue to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in finding the amount. The Minister for some time has not been as
accommodating as we should have hoped he would be, but I hope, seeing that we have got along so harmoniously thus far, that he is going to make this concession, which is going to mean a great deal to so many of the old people in the country. One of the things about the legislation that passes through the House of Commons is that it seems almost impossible for a Bill to become an Act of Parliament without getting into a most complicated condition that is difficult of understanding. In this Clause of the Bill I think we are adding to the complications, and are also going to debar many of the old people from ever entering into the enjoyment of a right which would mean a great deal to them at the present time. I think that in this connection the

Minister of Health might for once take a strong line, and it would be very good business from his own point of view. It would mean that we on these benches would regard his scheme ever so much more favourably, and also, I think, it would be a good lesson to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he imposes upon the Minister of Health the burden of carrying this Measure through. I would ask the Minister, in the name of these old folks, to meet the plea that has been put forward from these benches, and give them this concession.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 275; Noes, 136.

King, Captain Henry Douglas
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Storry Deans, R.


Kinloch Cooke, sir Clement
Perring, William George
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Lamb, J. Q.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Strickland, sir Gerald


Lane-Fax, Colonel George R.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frame)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Pielou, D. p.
Sugden, Sir Wilfred


Loder, J. de V.
Plicher, G.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Looker, Herbert William
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Lougher, L.
Preston, William
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Price, Major C. W. M.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell.


Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Raine, W.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Mac Andrew, Charles Glen
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Rentoul, G, S.
Waddington, R.


McLean, Major A.
Rice, Sir Frederick
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Ward, Lt.-Cot. A.L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Ropner, Major L.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. steel.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Watts, Dr. T.


Making, Brigadier-General E
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wells, S. R.


Margesson. Captain D.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Sandeman, A. Stewart
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Meller, R. J.
Sandon. Lord
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Merriman, F. B.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Meyer, Sir Frank
Savery, S. S.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Milne, J. S. Wardlaw.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl.(Renfrew, W.)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Shaw, Capt. W. w. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Simms, Or. John M. (Co. Down)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Sinclair, Col T. (Queen's Univ-, Beilst)
Wolmer, Viscount


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Skelton, A. N.
Womersley, W. J.


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Staney, Major P- Kenyon
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Murchison, C. K.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W.R., Ripon)'


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Newton, Sir D, G. c. (Cambridge)
Smithers, Waldron
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W.G.(Ptrsf'l'd.)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Spender Clay, Colonel H.
Wragg, Herbert


Nuttall, Ellis
Sprot, Sir Alexander



Oakley, T.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sdsn, E.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Orsmby-Gore, Hon. William
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G-(Westm'eland)
Captain Douglas Hacking and


Penny, Frederick George
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Mr. F. C. Thomson.




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pentypool)
Montague. Frederick


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Groves, T.
Morris, R. H.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Grundy, T. W.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Ammon, Charles George
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Oliver, George Harold


Attlee, Clement Richard
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Owen. Major G.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Baker, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Barnes, A.
Hardle, George D.
Potts, John S.


Barr, J.
Harney, E. A.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Batey, Joseph
Harris, Percy A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Ritson, J.


Broad, F. A.
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich)


Bromley, J.
Hayday, Arthur
Robertson, J. (Lanark. Bothwell)


Buchanan. G.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burniey)
Robinson. Sir T. (Lanes, Stretford)


Charleton. H. C.
Hirst, G. H.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Clowes, S.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Rose, Frank H,


Cluse, W. S.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Sakiatvala, Shapurji


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sexton, James


Compton, Joseph
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Connolly, M.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Cove, W. G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness).


Dalton, Hugh
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Sitch, Charles H.


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Kelly. W. T.
Smith. H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kennedy, T.
Smith, Rennie (Penlstone)


Day, Colonel Harry
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Snell, Harry


Dennison, R.
Kenyon, Barnet
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Duncan, C.
Kirkwood, D.
Stamford, T. W.


Dunnico, H.
Lawson, John James
Stephen, Campbell


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Lee, F.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollex)


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Lindley, F. W.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Weish Univer.)
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Forrest, W.
Lowth, T.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lunn, William
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Gibbins, Joseph
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Thurtie, E.


Glilett, George M.
Macdonald. Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Tinker, John Joseph


Gosling, Harry
Mackinder, W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Viant, S. P.


Greenall, T.
March, S.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)




Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Whiteley, W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Wiggins. William Martin
Windsor, Walter


Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Westwood, J.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)



Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Warne and Mr. T. Henderson.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill."

Mr. JOHNSTON: Before this Clause is added to the Bill, I should like to offer one or two observations upon its limitations. The hon. Member for York (Sir J. Marriott) referred to some of the (curious anomalies that had arisen under Clause 19, but under Clause 20 there are some still more curious anomalies. Henceforth, insured persons of any kind are no longer to have their old age pensions restricted or stopped because of a. means limit. They may have whatsoever income they like provided they have been insured persons. But persons who are outside this class do not have the means limit abolished. I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he cannot suggest any means, even at this late stage, whereby, before the Bill is through the House, this blot—because I am sure he recognises it as a blot—can be removed. It has been stated to be the intention of the Government to abolish this means limit altogether. As the Bill now stands, the means limit is only abolished for some classes and still obtains for others, and some of the other classes are the poorest of the poor. The Minister has previously expressed his regret at the long list of exclusions, and I trust he will be able to assure the Committee, before the Clause is ordered to stand part, that he will find some means whereby the classes I have enumerated shall, as well as the insured persons, have the means limit abolished and be enabled to get their old age pensions like the other classes who are obtaining other benefits under the Bill.

Mr. HARRIS: Before the Clause is passed, I think one thing wants to be made clear. The basis of our old age pensions scheme hitherto has been that it is a non-contributory scheme. The State recognised its obligations to its old people by giving out of national funds an old age pension with certain conditions as soon as a man or woman reached the age of 70. Now, under the Act, undoubtedly the old age pension is going to be associated with a contributory system of
insurance. It is quite clear that this Clause, at any rate as regards the means limit and the contribution paid into the Insurance Fund, will be the basis of certain rights to old age pensions. How far that will bring old age pensions under the contributory scheme wants to be made clear. Certainly, the impression outside is, somehow or other, that sooner or later the right to an old age pension is going to be based, at any rate in some of its phases, on the condition of having paid a contribution into the Insurance Fund under this contributory Bill. There is, naturally, a good deal of suspicion owing to this fact. I think the Minister should state the policy of the Government in reference to the whole system of old age pensions. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer introduced his Budget, he seemed to indicate that under this Bill some saving ultimately would come to the State through old age pensions because of the contributory scheme provided by this Bill, and I think the nation is entitled to have the position made quite clear, so that it should be certain that the great charter of the old people which was passed in 1908 by the Liberal party is in no way infringed by this Bill.

Major Sir BERTRAM FALLE: I think there is hardly a man in the Committee who does not agree that this means limit presses exceedingly hard upon the very old and the very poor. It was one of the great points of the Bill that we were told a restriction of the means limit would take place. It is not only that the means limit itself bears very hardly on the poor, but the way it is administered bears more hardly still. It is in the power of one inspector, man or woman, to declare that an old man has been guilty of fraud in minimising his income or incorrectly stating his age, and then he is not only obliged to pay back to whatever the age is, but he is not allowed to compound for what he honestly thinks is due. I have a case of a man of 81 who has to pay back £95, and it is impossible for him to do so as he is in a state of starvation. I hope the Minister will be able to see his way, if not now later, to make this what we all want it to be.

Mr. BASIL PETO: I should like to echo the appeal that has been made from other quarters of the House, that, before the Clause is passed, the Minister should make it clear that the Bill does not take away any existing right to an old age pension under the 1908 Act, that it does not make them contributory pensions, and the contributions required under this Bill are in respect of the new benefits conferred by the Bill—removal of the means disqualification, old age pensions at an earlier age, and pensions to the widow and orphan. I do not think that can be too clearly understood, particularly in view of the inuendoes that are being put about in the country with regard to the real purpose and the real operation of the Bill.

7.0 P.M.

Sir K. WOOD: I should like to make one or two observations in reply to questions addressed to me by various Members of the Committee. The first one was raised by the hon. Member for Dundee (Mr. Johnston). It really was an appeal for universal old age pensions without any test as to means or residence or nationality. The hon. Gentleman will no doubt remember the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the late Government was faced with a request of the same kind during his year of office, and I think the best reply which can be given now is the reply which he gave then, namely, that he had not the money to do it. I am informed, and perhaps the right hon. Gentleman will remember himself, that the cost of universal old age pensions would be £14,000,000 a year additional. It rises to about £19,000,000 a year in 20 years. Therefore, I am not surprised that the right hon. Gentleman was not able to put that matter forward then. It is simply a question of cost, and we are not in a position to find the money either.

Mr. JOHNSTON: May I ask the hon. Gentleman if he could not compromise by bringing in the non-insured categories of workers?

Sir K. WOOD: That again would be a very heavy class. The right hon. Gentleman himself was not able to do that. Anybody standing at this Box to-day would say he was not able to bring in a universal old age pension of that kind on account of the very large sums involved. I do not want to detain the Committee, and my
remarks will be brief. We certainly must not overlook the very considerable benefits which have been conferred by this Bill upon a section of the old age pensioners. Do not let us, in voicing our grievances about the people whom we would like to see made much better off, forget the considerable benefits which we are conferring by the Clause to-day. The hon. Gentleman for Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris) raised a question which has been raised several times in the course of the discussion. I remember the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain W. Benn) took an interest in the same matter, and that was the question of the contributory principle being adopted with reference to old age pensions and exactly what the effect was. My best reply would be to refer him to the very careful statement which appears on page 9 of the Actuary's Report, where I think it sets out very clearly and specifically exactly what is involved; the particular ages when the contributions do cover the cost of contributory old age pensions. They are set out in great detail. I do not think there is any reason to describe it or endeavour to minimise the principle which has been set up under this Bill with reference to old age pensions.

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: May I ask a question for the purpose of getting clarity? Page 9 to which he refers, when it speaks about the cost of old age pensions, does it mean just the cost of old age pensions to insured persons, or does it in any way refer to the cost to persons who are not insured?

Sir K. WOOD: All the reference that I have seen in the Report as I read it, has in contemplation the cost of pensions under this Bill and the cost of future pensions in respect of the people mentioned in the Report. The hon. and gallant Gentleman will see by referring to this Report that
persons who enter in 1926 at all ages over 18 will pay no part of the cost of the old Age pensions to which they will become entitled.
The other reference of which I think he would like to hear more is
The effect of the decennial increases of contribution is to place upon the contribution paid for future entrants into insurance at the ago of 16 the whole cost of the benefits up to the ago of 70.
I would draw his attention to the part which refers to the effect of the decennial
increase. That does not take place until that decennial period arrives, and no doubt the hon. and gallant Gentleman, who I hope will still be in the House then, will be able to press this matter more closely than he does to-day, because that is the time when it comes into operation. It should be plainly understood that the effects of this Bill, at any rate so far as the existing old age pensioners are concerned, are, in the first place, that it takes nothing away from them, and, in the second place, that it confers very considerable benefits upon a very large section of them. It cannot be too much emphasised that under the provisions of this Bill, in respect of a very large number of those old people to-day, all those humiliating tests and inquiries which have to be made under a scheme such as that at present are wiped away, and they will have their old age pension without any further test or inquiry. I should have liked to have devoted more time to this matter but a mass of work confronts the Committee, and the Committee will pardon me just briefly replying.

Captain BENN: I am sure we all sympathise with the feeling of the hon. Gentleman in desiring that we should not ponder too long over this aspect of the Bill, because the more people understand these features of the Bill the less they will like it. It appears that the criticism levied at the Bill is justified. He threw a doubt upon whether the decennial increase will ever take place or not. That was not the language of the Chancellor of the Exchequer who spoke about "dependent people" and a "fettered Parliament" and referred to freedom for both coming from these decennial increases. That is in passing. The plain fact is this. Whereas a person, whether insured or not insured to-day, looks forward to a pension at 70 as a gift from the Exchequer, by this Act he or she is going to be compelled to pay for the thing themselves. That is the point that we criticise, and that, as the hon. Gentleman frankly admits, is the case. This is a commercial scheme of course, and in the end will run on its own heels without help. It might be put into force by any statutory company. The hon. Gentleman admits that these people will not only have to pay for the abolition of the
means inquiry, but the people who to-day are expecting to receive a pension at 70 without any payment on their part, in future will be put upon a contributory scheme under which they themselves will ultimately bear the whole cost of the burden.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Is it in order to discuss this matter upon this Clause which deals entirely with the persons who are already 70 or will be 70 by the 2nd of July next? I am not at all challenging the hon. and gallant Member the right to discuss the question he is discussing, but I submit that it does not arise on this Clause.

Captain BENN: On that point of Order. I presume that the ground covered by the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Health may also be traversed by those who are criticising what was said.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): It, obviously, would not be in order to discuss the merits of the 1908 Old Age Pensions Act on this Clause. It certainly does deal with persons over 70 and it is rather a narrow dividing line to separate the two. I should be rather loath to strangle discussion unless it was clearly out of order.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: On a further point. May I point out that the hon. and gallant Member was not discussing the Old Age Pension Act at all. He was discussing the revision of contributions dealt with in Clause 42. and I submit to you the proper place to discuss that is on Clause 42 and not on Clause 20.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I had overlooked that point. I think the hon. Member will not be in order.

Captain BENN: I am not surprised that every device in the Standing Orders should be resorted to by the Government to burke this very important matter. I certainly do not intend to abuse the latitude which you have extended in the Debate by any lengthened remarks, provided it is made clear and remains unchallenged by the various spokesmen of the Government that under this Bill people who would otherwise receive a pension as a gift of the State are now being asked to contribute the total cost of that pension themselves.

Mr. WALLHEAD: I think it just about time the Government gave up legislating by reference to their predecessors. The Parliamentary Secretary has pointed out that he is not doing certain things now because the Chancellor of the Exchequer last year found himself unable to do things now asked for. I would like to point out that the Chancellor of the Exchequer last year, in dealing with this question of old age pensions, did so in the course of the formation of his Budget, but the Government are introducing a new Bill, and they are getting money from the people. The situation is not at all on all fours with what it was last year. We have asked for one or two very reasonable Amendments, and it is curious to note that the era of concessions appears to have come to an end. We had been getting along fairly comfortably and the Government had made certain concessions. But these have now ended. That, I take it, is on account of the by-election in the Forest of Dean drawing to a close, and the Government's chance of winning an election in a mining constituency has passed over too. That is how I should read it. I want to protest against these rather mean electoral methods in trying to gull the people of this country into believing they are getting something which they are not. This question which we are debarred from discussing now will be raised again on Clause 42, but I just want to protest against this method of refusing concessions on the ground that they could not be passed last year. The electoral methods adopted by the Government are bound to reap their own award.

Mr. T. THOMSON: There is just one question I want to ask the Parliamentary Secretary, namely, whether the old age pensioner who is not insured gets the advantage of exemption from the means limit?

Sir K. WOOD: If he is entitled to medical benefit, yes; if not, no.

Mr. THOMSON: I said if he was a non-insured person.

Sir K. WOOD: He may be deemed to be insured for the purpose of this Bill.

CLAUSE 21.—(Disqualifications.)

Miss WILKINSON: I beg to move, in page 30, line 22, to leave out Subsection (1).
In moving this Amendment, I hope that we shall receive the same cordial support from the Government Benches which we received when we moved a somewhat similar Amendment on Clause 6. This is part of a series of Amendments by which we object very strongly to the Government's policy in deciding under what circumstances a widow shall lose her pension. I would ask hon. Member's opposite to look at the terms of this Sub-section:
If any woman in receipt of a widow's pension under this Act is convicted of an offence.
It does not say what kind of offence. It does not say how serious or otherwise that offence may be, but it does say that if she is so convicted she may lose her pension. The offence may be trivial. She may not have paid her dog licence at the proper time. She may have been prosecuted for having set her chimney on fire, and yet under this Clause she may be reported to the Minister. I am not suggesting that that is likely to happen, but I am pointing out that that is what the Hill says. It will not be the benevolent intentions of the Ministry that will be considered in a Court of Law, but what the Bill actually says.
There are comparatively serious offences of which a woman may be convicted in a Court of Law, and the magistrate may consider that he ought to report her to the Ministry. Take, for example, shoplifting, or other forms of stealing. You are paying the woman an amount on which she cannot possibly live, and she may be driven in desperation to such a crime as that. Some magistrates take very serious views of any offence against property, and a woman may be convicted of an offence of that kind and be reported and lose her pension, although such offence? are not of a kind that in any way necessarily affect her ability as a mother. There are certain offences which render her unfitted to have charge of children or to have a pension, but both offences are amply dealt with in Clause 6, which provides that where certain offences are committed the pension may be taken away from the widow and may be administered for the benefit of the woman and her children. That is logical,
because she may be utterly unfitted to have charge of the money, and it is better that someone should administer the money for her.
In this case, it is suggested that the children remain with the woman and the woman 6hall be punished by a fine of 10s. a week for an unspecified period and for an unspecified offence. That is extremely unjust. A man may be convicted of exactly the same offence, and may be fined or sent to prison, but nothing happens in regard to his pension; but a woman who is convicted and either fined or sent to prison may be fined for the rest of her life 10s. a week or for such time as the Minister thinks expedient. That is a most unjust and unfair penalty to place upon the woman. Not only do you punish a woman who commits an offence—that is bad enough—but you punish the innocent children. The woman has to live, and if you take away her pension of 10s. a week and continue her allowance in respect of the children, it means that if she has three children, instead of living on 21s. she has to live on 11s. Therefore, for this offence the woman is penalised and her children have to be semi-starved in addition.
Yon are adding a completely new terror to the lives of these poor women. It is the poor woman who will have to suffer. The rich woman may commit the offence of shoplifting and be regarded as a kleptomaniac to be looked after by her relations. Where it is a poor woman, she is fined or sent to prison and then the majesty of the law is satisfied by fining hon. 10s. a week for the rest of her life or for such period as the Minister may determine. I would ask hon. Members opposite who are lawyers whether they consider that is just. It may be said that that would not be done except in a grave eventuality. In that case, why not put it in the Bill, or why not let it be dealt with under Clause 6? If the offence is so serious that the woman should be punished like this, then she is not fit to look after her children. We all know that certain magistrates consider crimes against property as amongst the gravest that any human being can commit. We may even have that type of person in some future Minister of Health to whom such cases may be
reported. I appeal to the Minister to show in regard to this matter the same very reasonable attitude that he showed when we made a similar appeal on Clause 6 (4). I hope that this Subsection will be withdrawn and that Clause 6 will be allowed to cover the whole of the offences that the Minister has in mind.

Mr. HARNEY: I beg to support the Amendment. One need only add a few words to show the indefensible character of the proposal. It says that a widow, if she is convicted, may be deprived of her pension. What about the married woman over 65 who has a pension, and who commits exactly the same sort of offence? She is not punished in this way. She may steal a small article, but she does not. lose her pension, but a widow of 65 who has a widow's pension and who steals a small article will lose her pension. How can that be justified? An old man drawing a pension may be guilty of theft and may be convicted and sent to prison. Of course, he does not get his pension while he is being supported in prison, but nothing else happens to him; but, if a widow in similar circumstances happens to be convicted for an identical offence and sent to prison, she can be deprived of her pension for all time. How can that be justified, especially when it is borne in mind that the very Act of Parliament which enacts only a suspensory disqualification of the old age pension is an Act of Parliament whereby the State grantee is called upon to surrender what the State grants? There is some justification for a State grant being withdrawn if the grantee misconducts himself in a very bad way, but even then the grantee—an old man or an old woman—is not deprived of the pension. It is. in fact, only suspended. The Post Office does not pay for keeping a person who is being kept in gaol or in a lunatic asylum or in a hospital.

Mr. BOOTHBY: I support the Amendment. I cannot understand how this Subsection ever came into the Bill. There is no justification for it in equity. If the Minister is not prepared to make a concession, I think we ought to appeal to the Attorney-General to bring his legal mind to bear upon this Sub-section. If a woman is brought before a Court of Law she ought to be punished by that Court according to the merits of her case, and
the matter ought to end there. This Sub-section imposes a further penalty to an unlimited extent. It holds an added terror over her, which depends entirely upon the Minister's own will as to the extent of her penalty. There is the further point that a married woman whose husband is alive may get a pension, and although she commits a misdemeanour her pension goes on, but in the case of a widow who commits a similar misdemeanour or felony the Court may report her to the Minister of Health and the Minister may decide to take away her pension for such time as he thinks fit. The effect of the Sub-section may be to influence the magistrate or Judge who is trying the ease. Supposing a magistrate or a Judge thinks fit to report a woman to the Minister, it is quite probable that he may seek to diminish the sentence that he would impose, in view of the possibility that the Minister may take action. I cannot see that there is any justification for this Sub-section, and I hope the Minister will see fit to withdraw it.

Mr. GERALD HURST: I support the Amendment because the Sub-section does not achieve a good purpose, and, even if it has a good purpose in view, it is inaptly worded to achieve that purpose. It is clear that it does not apply to the more serious offences, because Sub-section (3) incorporates into this Clause the provisions of the Old Age Pensions Act with regard to those offences for which the culprit is sent to prison. While the culprit is in prison the pension will stop in any event. Therefore, apparently Sub-section (1) is intended to refer to offences of a far less grave character. The Mover of the Amendment pointed out that there is no definition of the offence. It may be of a most trivial character. It certainly could not be of a grave character. Before a statutory right based on contribution is taken away you must have a far more stringent test by which to apply an act of disqualification than is applied in the case of a dole or a gift made as an act of grace by the State.
Here you have a statutory right interfered with because of an offence which is undefined and which must be an offence of a character less grave than one which carries with it the penalty of imprisonment without the option of a fine. Certain cases have been pointed out where
a person might be convicted for disobeying a bye-law of some borough with regard to some trifling matter. There are a thousand and one minor cases in which this Clause might become operative, and it will be competent for any magistrate in a case of that sort to report to the Minister the person who has been accused with a view not only to inflicting a fine but depriving that person of a statutory right of pension. That is against the whole spirit of the Act. It is sex discrimination, and in its present form totally unjustified. It may be that the true aim is to deal with the case of prostitution, because one gathers from Sub-section (2) that a woman is to be disqualified if she is cohabiting with somebody other than her husband. If the Clause is aimed at prostitution, then let the Clause so read that it refers to cases of prostitution and those cases only. In its present form it is highly objectionable to a very large number of Members on this side of the House.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I desire to support the Amendment on one further ground which has not been mentioned. What I fear very much will take place under this Sub-section is something like this. A woman will be suspected by the police of a certain course of life of which they disapprove. They will wait until she is convicted of some quite trumpery offence of a quite different character. The magistrate having in mind the suspicion that she is doing something that is wrong will report the case to the Minister who, in certain circumstances, still having this suspicion before him, will deprive the woman of her pension, not on account of the offence for which she is convicted but on account of this other suspicion with regard to which she has had no opportunity of proving her innocence. It has been within the knowledge of the House that this method of dealing with offences that cannot be proved in a Court of Law has been growing in this country of late. I oppose this sub-section on the grounds mentioned by the hon. Member for East Middlesbrough (Miss Wilkinson), and also because I believe that it is aimed at increasing the power of punishing people on suspicion which is very injurious to the community.

Lieut.-Commander ASTBURY: I join with other hon. Members in supporting this Amendment. There is great objec-
tion to the words in this Sub-section "is convicted of an offence." Why should not the offence disqualifying for a pension be clearly stated in the Sub-section? I suggest that it is not stated for the simple reason that the Sub-section only applies to certain offences committed by a certain class of women, and I would just like to draw the attention of the Committee to what I said on Sub-section (4) of Clause 6, that until you get some alteration in the law there is one law for one class of women in this country and another law for another class. This is the only one case in which a magistrate may fine or commit to prison on the uncorroborated testimony of a police officer alone. That is a condition of things which should not exist in law.
Most of these cases would come before unpaid Magistrates. Very few cases would come before paid Magistrates, and this might result in hundreds of cases being reported to the Minister of Health by certain benches of Magistrates. Is it right that the Minister of Health should have to bear the burden of saying whether the pension should be taken away or not? It would be impossible for him to go personally into all the cases that would be presented to him, and these cases would be decided not by the Minister himself but by his officials. Therefore, on these grounds and on other grounds which were mentioned in the Debate on Clause 6, I support this Amendment. This is a contributory pensions Bill, and inasmuch as a man or a woman has paid toward the pension, you have no right to take that pension away. If we insure our lives or insure against accidents in a commercial company, would it be held for one moment that, because a person commits a crime, probably a petty crime, that an insurance company would be at liberty to say, "You shall not have a penny of all the money which you have paid"? On that point, also, that as long as a person has paid for a pension no offence which he has committed should prevent him from getting his pension, I support the Amendment and trust that the Minister of Health will accept it.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I cast a hurried glance around the Committee just now to see if any hon. Member's face preserved a friendly character or
any hon. Member gave any indication of rising to support this Sub-section. Though the Sub-section is of importance it is not, perhaps, an essential part of the Bill, and, in view of the demonstrations which have taken place. I think, that perhaps my best course would be to take what the hon. Member for Camlachie (Mr. Stephen) a little while ago called a strong line, and execute a strategic movement to the rear. But having removed an apprehension from the minds of hon. Members by this announcement, I may be permitted to say just a few words, at any rate, to justify the original insertion of the Sub-section in the Bill.
I should begin by explaining the purpose and reason for its insertion. It was, of course, not intended to be operative in cases of miner offences. The whole purpose of this Sub-section was to prevent the occurrence of what might be come a public scandal. That was the payment of pensions, contributed to largely by the State, to persons who were carrying on a course of conduct which was not merely injurious to themselves—and I recognise the force of an observation that was made, I think by the hon. Member for Exeter (Sir R. Newman) on a previous Clause—but I am thinking of the case in which people are doing things not only injurious to themselves but, as a consequence of their action, injurious to the community as a whole—people who are doing anti-social acts. Though I propose to withdraw this Sub-section now, I believe that sooner or later it will come back—[HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] It may not come back exactly in this form, but sooner or later it will be found that something has to be done to prevent such a scandal as I have suggested.
I do not think that the question of sex discrimination enters into this Subsection. I know that it has appeared to do so to some hon. Members, but we are dealing here not with people of 65 and upwards. In their case the two sexes are in the same position, and whether the person is a man or a woman the Section does not apply. We are dealing here with the case of young women, and there is no parallel case in the male sex. Therefore, it cannot be argued that there is any sex discrimination. Secondly, we must not assume that any Court in the first instance, and the Minister in the second instance, is going to be entirely
destitute of common sense. That is the assumption which underlay the argument of the hon. Member who moved the Amendment, and it seemed to receive some support from the hon. Member behind me.
I submit that it would be perfectly easy to limit the kinds of case which would be dealt with under this Sub-section, and even to limit the period during which suspension might take place. I would not have stood on the question of cancellation at all. I would have been prepared to confine the discretion of the Minister to limited kinds of cases and a limited period during which the suspension might take place. I rather agree that the Sub-section as it stands appears to go further than was the intention of the Government. I think that those difficulties could have been removed, but I do not think it worth while, in view of the attitude of the majority of the Committee, to endeavour to retain the Sub-section, and therefore, although I wish my words to remain on record, I will agree to the Amendment.

The DEPUTY- CHAIRMAN: I was about to put the Amendment in the form that the words down to "Act" in line 23 stand part, in order to save the subsequent Amendment, but in view of the statement of the Minister I will put the Amendment to leave out Sub-section (1).

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause," put, and negatived.

Miss WILKINSON: I beg to move, in page 20, line 36, at the end, to insert the words
provided that she shall have the right to appeal to a Court of Law.
In thanking the Minister of Health For what he has done, while we are discussing Sub-section (2) of Clause 21 I wish to make clear that we have no objection to the principle of the Sub-section. Obviously, if a woman is being maintained regularly by a man, she is in the same financial position as his wife, and perhaps a better position. Therefore there is no question as to whether she should get a pension. But in suggesting that we take away the right to the pension, hon. Members on various sides have shown that they agree that the penalty is so great that we ought to be quite
sure that what we are taking away the pension for has actually been committed. I suggest that there might be a great many borderline cases in which it is very difficult to say whether a woman is as a fact cohabiting with a man or not, and in those circumstances she ought to have in some way the right of being able to appeal.
Take the case of a woman who is a housekeeper in the house of a working man, a woman who is herself a widow and is looking after a widower and his children. She may have her own children with them. That is one case. Another is the case of a lodger who is living with a widow and children. Anybody who knows anything of working-class life, or any other class of life in the community if it comes to that, knows how easily scandals can arise, and how Mrs. "So-and-so" starts talking, and anonymous letters are sent, and we have had quite sufficient experience of anonymous letter writing in connection with the Ministry of Pensions to know that once that sort of thing starts a woman may be unjustly deprived of her pension without any right of appeal.
I want to make it clear that we are not asking that the Minister, before taking away the pension, should prosecute the woman in a Court of law. Cohabitation is not an offence under the law. We are asking that the woman shall have the right to appeal. We are really giving away a. good deal in this. It would be perfectly logical for us to argue on Sub-section (2) exactly as we argued on Sub-section (1), that this pension had been paid for, and that therefore, whatever a woman's cause of action may be, when she has paid for that pension, she ought to have it. As one hon. Member said, "You would not deprive a woman of the money due to her if she had paid into a commercial insurance company for a widow's endowment policy," if there is such a thing. I think this Clause should be withdrawn, and I ask the Minister to consider whether he will do that. If he will not consider that, will he at least accept the Amendment? It is extremely important, because we do not want to have a woman deprived of her pension without any right of appeal, merely on the scandal-mongering of some neighbour. It is impossible for the Minister to go into
the details of this Clause as they are submitted to him. Before this Bill has been in operation long, a routine will be set up, and Clauses will be decided by-routine, and unless the woman's right of appeal is carefully safeguarded, a good deal of injustice may be done. I would remind the right hon. Gentleman that the withdrawing of this Clause, or the acceptance of the Amendment, would not cost the Exchequer anything. We are merely asking for something which is right in justice and equity.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member has perhaps not quite appreciated the provisions already existing in the Bill. She said that cohabitation was not an offence. Under the Bill for a widow to draw a pension, while cohabitating, is to commit an offence. Under Clause 33, the person who draws a pension by knowingly making any false statement, is liable on summary conviction to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months. There is no discretion there in the hands of the Minister.

Miss WILKINSON: Does the right hon. Gentleman mean that by this Bill he is adding a new crime to the domestic crimes for which a woman may be punished, the punishment not applying in the case of a man?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: How can you apply to the case of a man that which is applicable only to a widow?

Miss WILKINSON: You are punishing by a fine the widow for doing something for which the man is not punishable in any way.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The hon. Member does not understand.

Miss WILKINSON: It is very difficult to understand.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: You are providing here that the widow of an insured man is to receive a pension for life, unless she re-marries. It is possible for the woman to evade that by not marrying, but living with a man, and it is to prevent her doing that, and, therefore, cheating the Fund, that this Clause has been introduced. That is why it is made a crime, and a new crime, because the offence did not arise before this scheme was introduced. If the Minister had evidence
given to him that a woman was cohabitating, and her pension was taken away under this Sub-section without her being convicted in a Court of law, that case would come under Clause 28, Sub-section (2), and she would have a right of appeal against the order of the Minister.

Mr. HARNEY: If you add "decision" to "award" it would.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I have not had that point raised before. I am advised that that is so, but, in any case, another word in the Clause would make it clear.

Mr. ARTHUR GREENWOOD: Except by the award of the Minister. That would be quite different from the decision of the Court.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: We are not talking about the decision of the Court now; we are talking about the decision of the Minister. The hon. Member who moved the Amendment is afraid that the Minister may take away the pension, and the woman would then have no right of appeal. If the Minister did take such action, she would have a right of appeal under Clause 28, Sub section (2). Therefore, the point that the. Mover of the Amendment has made is met already in the Bill and the Amendment is not necessary.

Mr. A. GREENWOOD: As I understand it, drawing a pension when there is cohabitation is an offence under this Bill. If cohabitation has been proved in a Court of law and the pension has ceased to exist if does not seem to me that the Minister has any locus standi in the matter. Surely it is not for the Minister to say?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: There can be no question of a Court of law, unless there is a prosecution for the offence. I was dealing with cases where there was no prosecution, but where information had been received. If on such information the Minister took away the pension, the widow would have a right of appeal.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Would the right hon. Gentleman explain exactly the steps that would be taken. A woman, according to some information given, is cohabiting. What are the actual steps before the removal of the pension? What will happen?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Information having been received, the Minister would probably refer the matter to a local authority, and ask them to make such investigations as they thought necessary and to inform him of the result. If, as a result of the report made to him by the local authority, he is satisfied that cohabitation is taking place, he would no doubt stop the pension. In that case the woman would have a right of appeal. It would still be open to the Minister to prosecute the woman for having knowingly received the pension when she was cohabiting. The question then would be whether she should be punished or not; it would not be the question whether she should continue to receive her pension or not.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Is the woman going to have an opportunity of submitting her ease in person to the local authority or to any selected body dealing with the case? As far as one can judge, the procedure to be followed by the Ministry would be something like this: Some person who is not kindly disposed to the widow would send an anonymous letter to the Minister. The pension would be stopped and the widow might never get an opportunity of submitting her case in any way. When a pension is stopped under the existing Ministry of Pensions procedure, the woman may appeal against, the decision. She submits a letter in which she embodies her own case to the best of her ability. I would like the right hon. Gentleman to tell us when, if ever, the widow is to be permitted to submit her own case in person, and if she does get that privilege, to whom she will be permitted to submit her case. Neither Clause 29 nor Clause 33 is clear on that point. How is the case to be dealt with by the referee? Will the widow have an opportunity of putting her own case? If not, will she be permitted to have the assistance of some legal authority, so that at least she will be certain that every point is put? As has been said, this is a contributory pensions scheme, and before one widow's pension is taken away, we ought to ensure that she has had every opportunity afforded her, at least to prove that she has in no way been immoral. Fair play ought to be given to her.

Mr. DENNIS HERBERT: This Amendment raises rather a serious point, and I hope that we may have some assistance from the Attorney-General. What
occurred to me first, when the hon. Member moved the Amendment, was that it was obviously unnecessary, because if a pension to which a person is legally entitled is withheld on insufficient grounds, presumably the person concerned is entitled to sue in the Courts of Law. I am afraid that the Minister, when he replied, disturbed me a little by his reference to Clause 28, and when he spoke of reference to certain referees on the part of anyone who was dissatisfied with the award of the Minister. It looks to me very much as if this is one of those cases where the subject is going to be deprived of the right of resort to the Courts, and to be put off by the referees. What will the procedure be, supposing that the right of appeal is not taken away? Will the unfortunate pensioner, whose pension was improperly taken away, in order to sue for that pension have to file a petition of right, or what course can she take? Can she sue the Minister in his capacity as Minister? I do not know. It would be interesting if the Attorney-General would give us his views upon this point, and as to the right of the pensioners generally in the event of a pension being involved.

8.0 P.M.

Mr. MELLER: Might I ask whether the procedure proposed under this Bill is not procedure very common to that under the National Health Insurance? As I understand the position, it is this. In this Sub-section we have the case of a woman who is receiving a pension and at the same time cohabiting. Report is made to the Minister, and, under Clause 33, having made some inquiry, he finds that a prima facie case has been made, and he issues his order that the pension shall thereupon be stopped. The woman says, "I disagree with the award of the Minister, and I claim to have my case heard by a court of referees appointed by the Minister." The court makes its award, and it can give an award which is contrary to the decision of the Minister. Let me recall to the Committee the procedure common under the National Health Insurance Act. A member makes a claim against an approved society. The society says, "We do not think your claim is well-founded, and we do not propose to meet the claim." The member thereupon, acting under the rules, can apply for
arbitration. The arbitrator may give the award in favour of the society or in favour of the insured person. But, in any case, it is not the final court, because the insured person can go to the Minister of Health and say, "Will you, under the Act, appoint a referee to determine the case?" and he, having heard the case of the insured person, that person has the right to appeal, and I assume the procedure will be the same under this Bill. In the case of a woman, no doubt there will be a woman assessor sitting with the lawyer. The case is heard in a Court of Law, and, so far as the National Health Insurance Act is concerned, the proceedings set up under the Ministry of Health have been eminently satisfactory, and I know of no complaints against the procedure which has been adopted. You have the satisfaction of knowing that this course of procedure has been tried for a period of something like 13 years, and has not failed, so that the Committee may very well say to the Minister, "In this matter your experience has been good, and we are prepared to trust you."

Miss WILKINSON: I have consulted with the hon. and learned Member for Wallsend (Sir P. Hastings). He has looked into the matter raised by the Minister of Health, and thinks it well to withdraw this Amendment, provided that the Minister, when we come to Clause 28, will put in "or decision," so as to make the position quite clear. I ask leave, therefore, to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Lieut.-Colonel LAMBERT WARD: I beg to move, in page 20, line 36, at the end, to insert the words
or if she is proved to be leading an immoral life.
The case of a woman cohabitating with a man is dealt with in this Clause, but I think, from the point of view of the homo life, and from the point of view of the welfare of the children, it is a more serious matter to be indulging in immorality. In my opinion, the withdrawal of the previous Sub-section makes an Amendment of this character still more necessary. The right hon. Gentleman the Minister himself said when he withdrew that Sub-section that some safeguard or other might be necessary to deal
with the case of prostitution, and I submit that this Amendment does provide a safeguard against prostitution, which, in the opinion of many people, and in my opinion, would be far more disastrous from the point of view of the children's welfare than the mere act of cohabiting with a man.

Mr. HARNEY: There is an Amendment immediately following in my name, and I do not know whether it will be regarded as covered by the Amendment in the name of the hon. Lady which she has just withdrawn. My Amendment covers a good deal of the same ground, but it puts it more specifically.

The CHAIRMAN: I do not think the withdrawal of the last Amendment in any way prejudices the hon. and learned Member. If the Amendment were accepted, he would have to recast it, but the withdrawal of the last Amendment makes no difference.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: In considering the proposal put forward by my hon. and gallant Friend, it is well to remember that the Sub-section with which we are now dealing is not based upon the sexual immorality of the woman. It is based upon the fact that, by the act of cohabiting with a man, she is evading what is an essential part of this scheme. It is on the ground, therefore, of evasion of what is an essential part of the scheme that we put in this Sub-section, and not on the general ground that the woman is leading an immoral life. I am afraid I cannot accept the Amendment on other grounds. There is no question in this case of prosecution, much less, of conviction in a Court of law. My hon. and gallant Friend does not say how proof is to be established that the woman is leading an immoral life. If it is to be the duty of the Minister to investigate in order to satisfy himself, I must respectfully decline.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. HARNEY: I beg to move, in page 20, line 36, at the end, to insert the words
if the Minister, after due inquiries, so decides.
Provided that the woman shall have an opportunity of presenting her case personally or through a third, person on her behalf to a person or persons appointed by him.
I do not move this Amendment in order to reopen what was discussed by the hon. Lady, but the matter was then, left, in my submission, in a very unsatisfactory state. As I understand the position of Subsection (2) it is this. Of course, it is no offence for a woman to cohabit with a man, any more than it is for a man to cohabit with a woman, but it is said that, since you deprive a widow of her pension if she re-marries, it would be a rather anomalous thing to say she can continue to have her pension if she lives with a man without marrying. That I can quite understand, though even there there is a distinction, because if a widow re-marries, she is deprived of her pension because she has taken on another man whom the law places under an obligation to maintain her. But if she merely lives with a man, the law does not stand behind her, and that man can desert her the very next day, so that the cases are not alike. In one case, it is said she should lose her pension because the man is under an obligation to do what otherwise the State would do for her, whereas in the case of cohabitation she ought not to lose it, because the man is under no obligation to do what the State does for her. I do not press that, because it would be open to grave misconstruction, and would be regarded throughout the country as a premium on immorality. But what I think has not been made satisfactory is this. As I read the Bill, it says the woman shall be disqualified
if and so long as she and any person are cohabiting together as man and wife.
Who is to disqualify her? Not a word is said. Is it the Minister who is to disqualify her? Is it the local authority? Is it a disqualification by law, which has to be found out by appeal to a Court? Secondly, what is the disqualification for? Cohabiting. Is it for one night, two nights, three nights, four nights or any period? These are matters which cannot be left in this nebulous position, and, therefore, the right hon. Gentleman's answer to the hon. Lady was not really at all conclusive, because he said, "If you look further through the Bill, you will see that, assuming she is disqualified for cohabiting, then if she continues to draw her pension, she commits an offence, and can be prosecuted." That is all based on the assumption that she
has committed the disqualifying offence. We want to ascertain how that disqualifying offence has been brought home. I have put in my Amendment the words, "if the Minister, after due inquiries, so decides." There you have, for the first time, put in the Clause that somebody has to decide the fact of cohabitation, and my Amendment leaves it to the Minister. I hope if the right hon. Gentleman will not accept my Amendment in this form, that he will accept it in some form which will ensure a decision as to whether there has been cohabitation by someone; secondly, that, upon that decision there shall be an appeal; and, thirdly, that the unfortunate woman herself shall have a say in the inquiry as to whether she has been cohabiting.

Mr. DALTON: I want to enforce, by way of question, one of the points the hon. and learned Gentleman has put. Is there a legal definition of cohabitation or not? If the right hon. Gentleman the Minister does not know, perhaps the Attorney-General will tell us. The thing is left quite vague, and if some layman has to decide on the matter of legal interpretation, we shall be in a complete fog.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I think the hon. and learned Member's words would not make matters much better, because he himself has not indicated what it is the Minister is to decide. There are two questions here. There is the question of the disqualification, and the question of the fact of cohabitation, and the fact having been established, then the disqualification follows automatically. I am advised that the Clause as drafted has the effect of leaving it in the hands of the Minister to decide upon the question of fact as to cohabitation and the definition is, generally speaking, perfectly well understood. The inquiries which the hon. Member suggests should be made will of course be made and I am quite ready to look at this Sub-section again in the light of the observations of the hon and learned Member who moved the Amendment. I will see whether it could be better or more clearly worded in order to carry out the intention which I have described and which, I think, is the intention in the mind of the hon. and learned Member himself.

Amendment negatived.

Motion made, and question proposed, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

Mr. DAV1ES: Before we part with this Clause I should like to ask one question which I had intended to put to the right hon. Gentleman before he replied on the last Amendment. It is understood under this Clause that the machinery for penalising anybody committing an offence will be upon the lines provided in the National Health Insurance scheme and, so far as I know, there has not been much complaint as to the working of that scheme. Any scheme must provide for cases of this kind even though they are very rare, but when a woman is penalised by the withdrawal of a pension, consequent upon the fact that she has been cohabiting, I would like to know whether that penalty remains in force against her even though the co-habitation may cease. I think it would be wrong to pass legislation which would penalise the woman throughout her whole life simply because she had been found to commit an offence of the kind I have indicated. An hon. and learned Member opposite made some remarks about power to sue for benefits of this kind. So far as my knowledge goes there is no such power, and I know of no provision which would entitle an insured person under the Unemployment Insurance scheme, the National Health Insurance scheme or the Old Age Pension scheme to go to a Court of Law and sue for benefits. I am unwilling to give power to the legal profession to exploit this scheme as they are exploiting some other schemes. I am sorry to see so much money wasted on legal costs in connection with workmen's compensation, and I feel satisfied that the Minister realises that none of this money ought to be expended as money is expended, sometimes recklessly, in connection with workmen's compensation cases. I hope the Attorney-General will appreciate my point—that where a woman is penalised under this Clause, the penalty should be for a given period only, and that should she be given the opportunity of redeeming herself.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I am very glad to be able to answer this question. I think I can do so quite shortly and satisfactorily. If the hon. Member looks
at the words of the disqualification he will find that the woman is disqualified
if and so long as she and any person are cohabiting together as man and wife.
The moment cohabitation ceases ipso facto her qualification is restored.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Personally I do not feel disposed to agree to this Clause becoming part of the Bill unless we have a further definite understanding from the Parliamentary Secretary or the Attorney-General that the widow in every case will be given the opportunity of submitting her case to an impartial tribunal. One need not go over the arguments already submitted, and the results of the present procedure are so well known that it is unnecessary to repeat them, but surely the Parliamentary Secretary or the Attorney-General ought to guarantee to the Committee that when cases of this kind occur some better provision will be made for the widow to submit her case than is made under the Ministry of Pensions at the present moment. Let me put a hypothetical case based upon cases which have already happened, where widows have been deprived of pensions under the present Ministry of Pensions arrangement. The breadwinner is carried away prematurely, leaving a family behind, and the widow perforce must apply to the guardians. She is very often invited by the guardians to perform some kind of work, such as washing, and in case that is not available, then they ask her if she can take in lodgers. Lodgers are imposed upon thousands of women in older to eke out the inadequate sums granted in Poor Law relief.
Take the case of a widow, in these circumstances, who, under pressure from the guardians, accepts a lodger under her roof and later gets on friendly terms with some other individual, who is a potential husband. Surely it is not yet a crime in Britain for a widow to contemplate matrimony for the second time. Let us assume that nature follows the usual course and that an offence under this Bill is committed, and that the woman subsequently finds that the man in whom she is placing her faith has turned tail and has left her in her sad condition. The fact that she has a lodger under her root is prima facie evidence that cohabitation has been taking place, and unless something is done so that her full case can be sub-
mitted, she will lose her pension and will never have an opportunity of proving her case or justifying her actions. There are oases on record where widows' pensions have been taken away, and the widow herself has never had an opportunity of putting her case to a supposed impartial tribunal. Therefore, I do not think that we ought to allow such a provision to be repeated in this Bill. Men and boys and women all have to pay for these pensions before the pensions can be received, and they ought not to be deprived of those pensions and run the risk of having their characters brutalised by a section of the community which very often knows nothing about the situation which has resulted in an accident—to say the least of it—to the widow. Before we allow this Clause to pass in its present form, we ought to know whether in the Regulations or in some later Clause, such as Clause 28 or Clause 33, some definite provision will be made whereby a widow will be enabled to present her case to a tribunal either of local men or of National Insurance referees, or some body before whom she can put every part of her case and explain the whole circumstances with a fair, even chance of retaining the pension.

Mr. T. THOMSON: I wish to join in the appeal that has just been made to have an assurance before we leave this Clause that machinery will be provided whereby a woman may have every opportunity of making out her case. Reference has been made to the machinery under the National Health Insurance Act in regard to appeals, but I submit that there is a great difference between the two cases. In the one case the authority set up was the Minister of Health to deal with appeals against an approved society, but in this case it is an appeal against the Minister himself, and the Minister occupies a dual capacity; he sets up the authority, and he decides the appeal. Therefore, it stems to me that some additional protection is necessary, and I hope the Parliamentary Secretary will give an assurance that the women whose cases are brought under this Clause will have every opportunity of making known their eases and of having assistance in placing them before whatever authority is set up. It is very important that a House such as this is, composed predominantly of men,
should not do anything to place women who have to come before these courts at a disadvantage. We want to be particularly chivalrous and even meticulous to see that they have every advantage in making good their cases when they are brought under this Sub-section.

Mr. KELLY: I hope we shall divide against this Clause. I certainly cannot understand why it should be placed in this Bill, because one does not find the same restrictions in regard to pensions for civil servants or those in the Array and Navy. There is no such disqualification attaching to those people, and why we should place it in this Bill is something that I cannot understand. As I say, I hope to have an opportunity of going into the Division Lobby against it. I want to join in the appeal with regard to those widows who, because of their position, are compelled to take in lodgers in order to eke out a living. I know of one such case, where I, along with others, have investigated the whole circumstances, and I cannot find a scrap of evidence that warranted the Government Department taking away this widow's pension, but, because of statements made by people who did not like the woman, and for no other reason at all that I could discover, the widow has lost her pension and has been dealt with in that way for a considerable time, and we have not been able to have the position altered. Knowing full well how local committees who advise Government Departments treat such cases, I hope the Committee is going to divide against this particular Clause remaining in the Bill. Sub-section (2) is quite as bad as Subsection (1), which the Government have already agreed to withdraw, and I hope even yet that they will agree to the withdrawal of this Sub-section.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: It is obvious, from the language of the last speaker, that it is no good trying to convince him, because he is going to divide against the Clause, whatever happens—we have no intention of withdrawing it—but there may be others whose minds are more open to reason, and for their benefit I may explain that the object of the Clause, as it now stands, as, indeed, has already been stated by my right hon. Friend the Minister of Health, is that the pension is given until re-marriage. If you allow a woman, by the mere device of not
going through the ceremony of marriage, to live with a man as his wife and continue to draw this benefit, you are, as a previous speaker has said, putting a premium on immorality, and that we are not prepared to do.
Now I want to answer the more serious questions put to me, and I hope to give a satisfactory answer to both of them. Both the hon. Member for West Middlesbrough (Mr. T. Thomson) and the hon. Member for the Don Valley (Mr. T. Williams) were anxious to be assured that there would be an opportunity for the widows to put their case. There is every intention that there shall be that opportunity. As we understand the Clause, the decision of the Minister that a particular widow is disqualified by reason of cohabitation would obviously be subject to appeal under Clause 28. My right hon. Friend has said that he will make sure that that is so, and, therefore, hon. Members on both sides may be quite sure that there will be an appeal under Clause 28. When you come to Clause 28, you will find, under Sub-section (2), that the appeal is to be made, not, as the hon. Member for West Middlesbrough thought, to somebody appointed by the Minister, but to somebody selected from a panel of referees, to be appointed in accordance with regulations, made, not by the Minister, but by the National Health Insurance Committee, and as the Committee has already heard, the National Health Insurance Committee has been operating precisely similar powers under the National Health Insurance Act for some years past.
The procedure was explained by my hon. Friend the Member for Mitcham (Mr. Meller) better than I can do it, and he has told the Committee how ample provision is made that every case that comes before these panels is heard in full and that the person who appeals has an opportunity of fully stating his or her case, and, although I am speaking in the presence of people who know better than I do, I think it is a fact that the procedure which has been there laid down has operated quite smoothly and with satisfaction to all parties during all the years that it has been in operation. We propose that the same procedure shall be used with regard to this Bill as has been
used successfully with regard to the previous one, and a procedure which, as I have said, does in fact provide for the widow to have an opportunity of stating her case.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: The Minister has not explained why the Government propose to make a difference between one woman and another, and it seems to me that the widow, who has the least chance of any, is to be made a scapegoat under this Clause. I have had some experience of the poor, a very long experience, and I know only too well the position of the widow with children. A widow appearing before a board of guardians which has no soul—and some have not—is told, because she is living in a locality that is only decent, that the rent is too great, and that she must get out of that part of the town or village into some other part, where she may pay less rent, and consequently neither widow nor children have any chance. I plead for the widow, that we should give her an opportunity. She has enough enemies without the law making more. There are plenty of people who are always ready to do her an unkindly act. That has been my experience all alone the line, and I trust that, after these matters have been placed fully before the Government, they will say that the widow has as much right to justice as any other body coming under this Act.

Major HORE-BELISHA: I listened to the Attorney-General with great foreboding, because I think it is the first time that a provision of this kind has been inserted in any Statute. I do not think you will find any precedent for inserting a vague excuse such as this for depriving somebody of something for which they have contributed and to which they are, therefore, entitled. I rest my objection on this: I quite realise the Attorney-General's point that it is obviously undesirable and against the taxpayers' interest that a person should avoid marriage in order to obtain the pension for which re-marriage is a disqualification. That is a perfectly comprehensible point, but it has hitherto been the pride of English law that it has been specific and definite, and to insert in an Act of Parliament a phrase of this kind, that for cohabitation a person shall be disqualified, without defining what cohabitation means, seems to me to be placing the law on a very vague basis and to be placing
the woman in a very degrading position, You may say that there is a reference to the Court of Referees, and a decision; but what sort of trial is that going to be? How is the woman going to be represented? What is the charge against her? Are you going to draw up an indictment and say that this woman did this, that and the other at certain times, or in what way are you going to bring this charge against her? In what way is she going to be able to meet it? This is a very serious point.
I do not think there is a precedent in English law for setting up an offence which you do not define in clear and specific terms. Then, another ground on which I object to the Clause is this, that the Minister becomes a moral arbiter. He becomes a censor of morals. The Minister of Health was not selected for his particular appointment because of his moral qualifications, not because of his ability to discriminate between good and evil in an ethical sense. He was selected, presumably, because of his political capacity. If you are going to call upon him to exercise a kind of moral jurisdiction you are placing him in a most invidious and unfair position. You are saying to him in effect there is something of the devil about that particular woman, and you have to decide what actually took place! How can the right hon. Gentleman do it? He has not the apparatu.3 for deciding. He cannot call the necessary evidence, and, therefore, he cannot give a fair decision in the matter. You are setting up for the Minister an office for which it is obvious he was never intended at all. I hope that between

now and the Report stage that this aspect of the matter will be considered. Anybody may become a Minister of Health nowadays, whatever his views may be. A lady may become Minister of Health. Mrs. Grundy herself might be appointed to that august position, and under her ægis and regime we do not know what might happen. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear."] I am told she is very anxious to get here. Many more women will be then disqualified than under the broad and just jurisdiction of the present Minister. I feel it is the most serious point, and I resent the suggestion put forward. I, however, quite appreciate the reasons for which it has been put forward, but I think those reasons should be couched in language which can be "understanded of the people" who have got to suffer for it. I quite understand that while a person has to be maintained in a public institution that you ought to deprive him or her of benefit under this Bill-if you are spending money on them. But there is no reason whatever to select one particular form of moral iniquity which you call cohabitation, and say it is a very much graver thing than any other thing which can possibly be done. As a matter of fact, everybody knows that there are many more serious crimes, or sins, and greater sins, than cohabitation. Why do you not,select some of these? There are many more sinful things than cohabitation, and I submit it is very unfair to select this particular one.

Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 241; Noes, 125.

Division No. 276.]
AYES.
[6.45 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gates, Percy


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Chapman, Sir S.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham


Alexander, Sir Win. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Chilcott, Sir Warden
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Christie, J. A.
Goff, Sir Park


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Gower, Sir Robert


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Clarry, Reginald George
Grace, John


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Clayton, G. C.
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Gretton, Colonel John


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Cooper, A. Duff
Grotrian, H. Brent


Balniel, Lord
Cope, Major William
Guinness. Rt. Hon. Waiter E.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Couper, J. B.
Gunston Captain D. W.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Mall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)


Beckett, Sir Gervase (Leeds, N.)
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hammersley, S. S.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Harland, A.


Berry, Sir George
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Bethell, A.
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Haslam, Henry C.


Blundell, F. N.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hawke, John Anthony


Boothby, R. J. G.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Dalziel, Sir Davison
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)


Bowyer, Captain G. E. w.
Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootie)


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Brass, Captain W.
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Davies, Maj Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovit)
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.


Briggs, J. Harold
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Briscoe, Richard George
Dawson, Sir Philip
Herbert, S,(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Dixey, A. C
Hogg, Rt. Hon Sir D.(St Marylebone)


Broun-Lindsay. Major H.
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Brown, Maj. D. C.(N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Drewe, C.
Holt. Capt. H. P.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Edmonson, Major A. J.
Homan, C. W. J.


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Bullock, Captain M.
Elveden, Viscount
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Burman, J. B.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.


Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Home, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)


Butler. Sir Geoffreyo
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Fermoy, Lord
Hurst, Gerald B.


Caine, Gordon Hall
Fielden, E. B.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Campbell, E. T.
Fleming, D. P.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Classes, J. D.
Ford, P. J.
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Jacob, A. E.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert


Cazalet Captain Victor A.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Jephcott, A. R.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Kennedy. A. R. (Preston)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Ganzoni, Sir John
Kindersley, Major G. M.


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Storry Deans, R.


Kinloch Cooke, sir Clement
Perring, William George
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Lamb, J. Q.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Strickland, sir Gerald


Lane-Fax, Colonel George R.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frame)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Pielou, D. p.
Sugden, Sir Wilfred


Loder, J. de V.
Plicher, G.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Looker, Herbert William
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Lougher, L.
Preston, William
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Lowe, Sir Francis William
Price, Major C. W. M.
Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W. Mitchell.


Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Raine, W.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Mac Andrew, Charles Glen
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Rentoul, G, S.
Waddington, R.


McLean, Major A.
Rice, Sir Frederick
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Ward, Lt.-Cot. A.L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


McNeill, Rt. Hon. Ronald John
Ropner, Major L.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. steel.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Watts, Dr. T.


Making, Brigadier-General E
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wells, S. R.


Margesson. Captain D.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Sandeman, A. Stewart
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Meller, R. J.
Sandon. Lord
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Merriman, F. B.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Meyer, Sir Frank
Savery, S. S.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Milne, J. S. Wardlaw.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl.(Renfrew, W.)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Shaw, Capt. W. w. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Simms, Or. John M. (Co. Down)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Sinclair, Col T. (Queen's Univ-, Beilst)
Wolmer, Viscount


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Skelton, A. N.
Womersley, W. J.


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Staney, Major P- Kenyon
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Murchison, C. K.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W.R., Ripon)'


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Newton, Sir D, G. c. (Cambridge)
Smithers, Waldron
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W.G.(Ptrsf'l'd.)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Spender Clay, Colonel H.
Wragg, Herbert


Nuttall, Ellis
Sprot, Sir Alexander



Oakley, T.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sdsn, E.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Orsmby-Gore, Hon. William
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G-(Westm'eland)
Captain Douglas Hacking and


Penny, Frederick George
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Mr. F. C. Thomson.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pentypool)
Montague. Frederick


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Groves, T.
Morris, R. H.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Grundy, T. W.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)


Ammon, Charles George
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Oliver, George Harold


Attlee, Clement Richard
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Owen. Major G.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Baker, Walter
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Barnes, A.
Hardle, George D.
Potts, John S.


Barr, J.
Harney, E. A.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Batey, Joseph
Harris, Percy A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Ritson, J.


Broad, F. A.
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich)


Bromley, J.
Hayday, Arthur
Robertson, J. (Lanark. Bothwell)


Buchanan. G.
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burniey)
Robinson. Sir T. (Lanes, Stretford)


Charleton. H. C.
Hirst, G. H.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Clowes, S.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Rose, Frank H,


Cluse, W. S.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Sakiatvala, Shapurji


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sexton, James


Compton, Joseph
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Connolly, M.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Cove, W. G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness).


Dalton, Hugh
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Sitch, Charles H.


Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Kelly. W. T.
Smith. H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kennedy, T.
Smith, Rennie (Penlstone)


Day, Colonel Harry
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Snell, Harry


Dennison, R.
Kenyon, Barnet
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Duncan, C.
Kirkwood, D.
Stamford, T. W.


Dunnico, H.
Lawson, John James
Stephen, Campbell


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Lee, F.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollex)


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Lindley, F. W.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Weish Univer.)
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Forrest, W.
Lowth, T.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Garro-Jones, Captain G. M.
Lunn, William
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Gibbins, Joseph
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Thurtie, E.


Glilett, George M.
Macdonald. Sir Murdoch (Inverness)
Tinker, John Joseph


Gosling, Harry
Mackinder, W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Viant, S. P.


Greenall, T.
March, S.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Maxton, James
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)




Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Whiteley, W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney
Wiggins. William Martin
Windsor, Walter


Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah
Wilkinson, Ellen C.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Westwood, J.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)



Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Warne and Mr. T. Henderson.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City) 


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.) 


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Brass, captain W.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A. 


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Briggs, J. Harold
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool.W. Derby)
Briscoe, Richard George
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood) 


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Chapman, Sir S. 


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Chilcott, Sir Warden


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Brown, Maj. D. C.(N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Christie, J. A.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Clarry, Reginald George


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Bullock, Captain M.
Clayton, G. C.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Berry, Sir George
Burman, J. B.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.


Bethell, A.
Burney, Lieut..Com. Charles D.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Couper, J. B.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Butt, Sir Alfred
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry


Blundell, F.N.
Campbell, E. T.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Casseis, J. D.
Crook, C. W.


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Hope, Sir Harry (Fortar)
Raine, W.


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Cunlitte, Joseph Herbert
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Rawson, Alfred Cooper


Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Remer, J. R.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Rentoul, G. S.


Dalziel, Sir Davison
Hume, Sir G. H.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Davidson, (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Hurd, Percy A.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Strettord)


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Ropner, Major L.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F, (Somerset, Yeovil)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Jacob, A. E,
Rye, F.C.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Jephcott, A. R.
Salmon, Major I.


Dixey, A. C.
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Drewe, C.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Sandon Lord


Elliot, Captain Walter E
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Elveden, viscount
Lamb, J. Q.
Savery, S. S.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Little, Or. E. Graham
Shaw, Lt. Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Fairfax, Captain J. G,
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Finburgh, S.
Loder, J. de V.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Fleming, D. P.
Looker, Herbert William
Sinclair, Col. T.(Queen's Univ., Beltst.)


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Lougher, L.
Skelton, A. N.


Forrest, W.
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Lumley, L. R.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E,
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Smithers, Waldron


Galbraith, J. F. W.
McLean, Major A.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Ganzoni, Sir John
Macmillan, Captain H.
Stanley, Hon. o. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Gates, Percy
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Storry Deans, R.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel w. H.


Goff, Sir Park
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Grace, John
Meller, R. J.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Greene, W. p. Crawford
Merriman, F. B.
Tasker, Major R. Ingo


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Meyer, Sir Frank
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Grotrian, H. Brent
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Waiter E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Waddington, R.


Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Easthourne)
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Ward, Lt.-Col. A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Hammersley, S, S.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Harland, A.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Wells, S. R.


Harrison, G. J. C.
Nuttall, Ellis
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Oakley, T.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Harvey, Major s. E. (Devon, Totnes)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Hasiam, Henry C.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Hawke, John Anthony
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Penny, Frederick George
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V, L. (Bootie)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Perring, William George
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Wolmer, Viscount


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Philipson, Mabel
Womersley, W. J.


Hogg. Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Pielou, D. p.
Wood. R. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Pilcher G.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Holt. Capt. H. p.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Wragg, Herburt


Homan, C. W. J.
Preston William



Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Price, Major C. W. M.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—




Major Cope and Major Hennessy.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. VI. (Fife, West)
Cove, W. G.
Guest. J. (York, Hemsworth)


Adamson, w. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Guest, Dr. L, Haden (Southwark, N.)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbor')
Dalton, Hugh
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)


Ammon, Charles George
Davies, Ellis (Denbigh, Denbigh)
Hall. G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hardle, George D.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Day, Colonel Harry
Harris, Percy A.


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Dennison, R.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon


Barr, J.
Duncan, C.
Hayday, Arthur


Batey, Joseph
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Henderson, Right Hon A. (Burnley)


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)


Broad, F. A.
Gibbins, Joseph
Hirst, G. H


Bromley, J.
Gillett, George M.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Buchanan, G.
Gosling, Harry
Hore-Belisha, Leslie


Charleton, H. C.
Greenall, T.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)


Clowes, S.
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Cluse, W. S.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Compton, Joseph
Groves, T.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Connolly, M.
Grundy, T. W.
Kelly, W. T.




Kennedy, T.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Ponsonby, Arthur
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Kenyon, Barnet
Potts, John S.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Kirkwood, D.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Thurtie, E.


Lawson, John James
Riley, Ben
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Lee, F.
Ritson, J.
Viant, S. P.


Lindley, F. W.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Livingstone, A. M.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Lowth, T.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Lunn, William
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Scurr, John
Westwood, J.


Mackinder, W.
Sexton, James
Wheatley, Bt. Hon. J.


MacLaren, Andrew
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Whiteley, W.


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Wilkinson, Ellen c.


March, S.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Maxton, James
Sitch, Charles H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighiey)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Montague, Frederick
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Morris, R. H.
Snell, Harry
Windsor, Walter


Morrison. R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Wright, W.


Oliver, George Harold
Stamford, T. W.
Young, Robert (Lancaster. Newton)


Paling, W.
Stephen, Campbell



Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Warne and Mr. A. Barnes.


Question, "That the Clause stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

CLAUSE 22.—(Residential qualification of pensioners, etc.

The CHAIRMAN: The first Amendment, standing in the name of the hon. Member for Carmarthen (Sir A. Mond)— in page 21, line 11, at the beginning, to insert the words "Except as hereinafter provided "—is unnecessary. With regard to the next four Amendments, standing in the names of the hon. Member for the University of Wales (Captain E. Evans), the hon. Member for Peckham (Mr. Dalton), and the hon. Member for Devon-port (Major Hore-Belisha), they raise practically the same issue, and I suggest that they should all four be discussed together. I do not say necessarily that Divisions might not be taken on them separately, if they were thought to of sufficiently important, but I think the discussion must embrace all four.

Mr. DALTON: I beg to move, in page 21, line 13, to leave out paragraph (a).
I am moving this Amendment in the absence of the six Liberal Members who had put their names to an Amendment, and whose interest in the Bill is waning or who are taking a late meal. I regard this Clause as being very objectionable. The paragraph which I am moving to omit creates yet another offence. Under the last Clause, cohabitation becomes an offence: and under this Clause foreign travel is to be made an offence. The Clause provides that persons absenting themselves from Great Britain, even though they have crossed to Northern Ireland, will lose their pensions during the period of their absence. I cannot imagine any purpose which this provision is sup-
posed to serve, except that of effecting a mean and unjustifiable economy. It if no longer the case, as it was at one time, that foreign travel is the monopoly of the rich, and I am very glad that it is so. It is one of the most hopeful signs of the times that foreign travel is being brought more and more within the reach of sections of the community who at one time were unable to afford it. Organisations such as the Workers' Travel Association are doing most excellent work, and making a very practical contribution towards international understanding by enabling large sections of those among whom these pensioners will be found to take holidays in foreign countries as cheaply, very often, as they do here.
While a person going to Margate for a fortnight will retain his pension, anyone crossing the Channel to some resort on the French or Belgian coast will lose it. As I understand this Clause, it applies both to old age pensions and to widows' pensions; perhaps I shall be corrected if I am wrong. That means that an old man or old woman who crosses to France in order to stand by the grave of a son killed in the War is deprived of pension for the period of absence. Many other examples could be quoted to show the extraordinarily objectionable and arbitrary nature of this Clause. Even crossing to Ulster is an offence which will entail loss of pension. T think these considerations alone, though many others could be added, suffice to show that paragraph (a) should be omitted.
If this Amendment be not accepted, what machinery is to be set up in order
to trace the movements of pensioners crossing the Irish Channel or crossing to France or Belgium? It is quite true that by an elaborate method of liaison with the Foreign Office and other agencies of espionage it might be possible to trace people, but it is going to add considerably to the cost and the trouble, and I think that on grounds both of justice and of administrative expediency the case made out for the Amendment is unanswerable. That does not mean that it will not be answered, but I submit that it cannot be answered in any very satisfactory manner.

Major HORE-BELISHA: I cannot understand why residence abroad should be added to the undesirable occupations which this Bill desires to prevent. I would ask the Attorney-General, or whoever is going to reply, what is to happen in the case of those engaged in His Majesty's forces. You are exacting contributions from them, and yet you say that if they should choose to settle at a foreign station, as many of them do, then they cannot get a farthing of benefit for any of their contributions. Have the Government considered the position of these officers and men? If not, I feel sure that they will accept this Amendment? Nothing is more common than that a wife should join her husband abroad and remain there, and it seems inconsiderate and ill-considered that you should put this provision into this Clause.
One of the main objections to the pre-War Pensions Act is this inhibition against foreign travel, because you prevent an old man joining his son in Canada or going abroad for any other purpose. However desirable this may be in a non-contributory pension scheme, it certainly cannot be justified in a contributory pension scheme. There is no insurance company in the country which would deprive persons of benefit upon the ground that they did not happen to be residing in this country. It is mainly on account of the position of those engaged in His Majesty's Service that I support this Amendment. There are many other servants of the Crown who go to places like India and Shanghai and who may so like the climate that they stay there. Under these circumstances I fail to see how this Subsection can be justified.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: May I first correct a misapprehension? The Mover of this Amendment said that this was a new offence created under this Bill, and whoever went abroad forfeited his pension, and that there would have to be elaborate machinery set up to ascertain when a person was out of Great Britain. When one looks at the Clause closely, it will be found that it does not do anything such as the hon. Member seems to imagine. Nobody forfeits any pension who travels. The only point is that the pension is not payable while the person is abroad, and if one of these insured persons indulges in foreign travel, he can go abroad for six weeks or two or three months enjoying foreign travel, and when he comes back he can draw the arrears of his pension. It is an entire mistake to suppose that this Clause automatically forfeits the pension if anybody goes abroad. All it does is to provide that while the person is abroad he shall not draw the pension, and the maximum he is allowed to draw at one time is three months.
9.0P.M.
The question of a persons movements does not really arise, because if the pensioner is abroad he cannot come to the Post Office to get his pension money. It would be almost impossible to provide, as desired by the Mover of this Amendment, that when these old age pensioners and widows are travelling abroad they should be provided with facilities for obtaining their 10s. a week at whatever foreign resort they might be visiting. The real purpose is to provide that, if they are absent from Great Britain, they cannot, while away, receive the pension payable to them, and they will not get it until they come back. In paragraph (b) we provide that the maximum amount they can draw is three months, and there is no question of a penalty being placed on foreign travel.
It has been suggested that this is a new departure, but so far from this being the case, I would like to point out that this provision has been taken out of the Old Age Pensions Act. 1911. which has been the law for the last 14 years. If hon. Members will look at Section 5 of the Act of 1911, they will find precisely the provision which has been called by some hon. Members an unprecedented novelty and
an infringement of the rights of citizens. I am now dealing with the point that this disqualification is said to be an unprecedented innovation. It is true that the Old Age Pensions Act did not deal with contributory pensions, but with pensions given to aged people, but it gave them on certain conditions, and one of those conditions was exactly the one we are now discussing. Therefore there is no question of it being an unprecedented innovation, and it is merely a re-enactment of an existing restriction. It is said that this restriction is unreasonable because there would be members of His Majesty's Forces abroad who would stay there until 65, and they would not be able to draw their pension. I doubt whether many of them remain in the Force until they are 65 years of age, but those who stay abroad until they reach that age would not be taking on those duties after leaving the Force, and therefore they would not be insured persons.

Major HORE-BELISHA: What about the widow?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: If the retired member of the force is not an insured person, whether in England or not, his widow does not get a pension.

Mr. BECKETT: What about a married soldier in Rangoon whose wife dies?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: Obviously, if she dies while he is an insured person, she will not be there to draw the pension.

Mr. BECKETT: I meant if the man dies first.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: If a member of the force retires he would in every case drop out of the insured persons and he would not be contributing to benefits.

Captain WATERHOUSE: What if he dies within six months of his discharge?

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I doubt whether he would come in.

Major HORE-BELISHA: Yes.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I will look into that case, but, as far as the general scheme of the Bill is concerned, people who are resident outside Great Britain are not insured persons. The position with regard to people who go abroad is that they can go abroad for three months and come back and draw
their arrears of pension, and continue to be entitled to their pension. The only loss that would be sustained in such cases would be that, if they started on a long trip and did not come back within three months, they could not then draw the excess pension beyond the three months. That provision, as I have said, has been taken from the Act of 1911, where, as far as I know, it has worked quite satisfactorily. It does not seem unreasonable, because any provision that people abroad should be entitled to pension would lead to very great administrative difficulties in regard to payment, and also in regard to ascertaining, in the case of a widow, whether she was still alive, or had remarried, or otherwise become disqualified. It would be quite impossible to deal with matters of that kind, because the people concerned might be in various parts of the world, possibly even at the other end of the world. I think that when the Clause is looked into it will be seen that there is really no grievance, and no more reason in this case than in the Old Age Pensions Act, 1911, to provide that people abroad shall continue to draw pensions while they are away, although there is no machinery available.

Mr. TAYLOR: May I ask the Attorney-General to consider this Clause in the light of possible developments in the distribution of population within the Empire—

The CHAIRMAN: There is another Amendment dealing with that point, which I propose to call presently, and we cannot have two discussions.

Captain WATERHOUSE: Have we not arranged that the first four Amendments should be discussed now?

The CHAIRMAN: I have ruled that the first of those was unnecessary, but the one to which I am referring will be called separately. It is the Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Attercliffe (Mr. Cecil Wilson), in page 21, line 14, after the word "Britain," to insert the words "and not in any of His Majesty's Dominions." The particular case of those who are resident within the Empire would come in on that Amendment.

Mr. TAYLOR: I understood you to rule that the four Amendments could be dealt with together, and that was why I rose to put this point.

The CHAIRMAN: The Amendment to which I am referring is the sixth.

Mr. TAYLOR: Do I understand that there will be an opportunity to discuss this point on that Amendment?

The CHAIRMAN: Certainly.

Mr. TAYLOR: And, even if this Clause be passed, will it be possible on the later Amendment to consider the cases of people who leave this country at the age of 65 and go to reside, say, with their sons in Cadada?

The CHAIRMAN: I am not speaking of the Clause being passed, but of the discussion on the point raised by the hon. Member. All I have said is that I propose to call an Amendment dealing with the case of those who go to the Dominions, and we cannot have two discussions. That case will coma under that Amendment, and not under the present Amendment. I have taken great care to save that Amendment in the way I put the question, and the whole question of those who go, not abroad, but to other parts of the Empire, will come in on that Amendment.

Mr. WALLHEAD: The Attorney-General is an exceedingly skilful debater, and usually puts his points with extreme lucidity, but I am bound to confess that on this occasion he has failed to convince me that the parallels he has quoted between the Act of 1911 and the present Bill are altogether on all fours. He has quoted the Act of 1911 as giving some ground for the insertion of this three months' disqualification in the present Bill, but surely the distinction is that, in the first case, the State granted a pension to persons who were 70 years of age, while in the present case the moneys received by the persons have been paid for by themselves. That does seem to me to constitute a very real difference between the cases, and to show that the circumstances are not on all fours. I suggest that the Government should reconsider their decision on this matter. When the State is granting a pension, it might be perfectly right to insert the Clause referred to in the Act of 1911, and it may be that it has worked quite well, but the circumstances here are different. In the case of the Act of 1911 it might be argued that generally there would
be no hardship, because the recipients of such pensions would not be in a position to travel abroad to any great extent; but in this case the thrift disqualification has been swept aside, and, therefore, that argument does not arise. The main argument in favour of this Amendment is the one referring to the three months' disqualification. The recipients have paid for this pension, and have a right to get it, no matter how long they may be out of the country having paid for the moneys which they hope to receive.

Sir MALCOLM MACNAGHTEN: I was extremely glad to hear that the Attorney-General will give his careful consideration to the case of Members of His Majesty's Forces who might lose their pension by residence abroad. May I invite his attention to a particular case, which I think is deserving of special consideration, namely, the ease of those members of His Majesty's Forces who are recruited in Northern Ireland? I am entitled to appeal on their behalf more especially because it appears, from the Reports of the Director-General of Recruiting, that it is from Northern Ireland that the larger number—

The CHAIRMAN: I think this, too, is an argument proper to the subsequent Amendment in the name, of the hon. Member for Attercliffe.

Mr. BECKETT: I want to detain the Committee for a moment to clear up a matter with regard to soldiers taking their discharge, or to their widows or their families, abroad, which, unfortunately, owing to a slip of my tongue in putting it, the Attorney-General, with his usual legal skill, was able to evade instead of replying to it. The point which he did not answer, and which he was saved from answering owing to his ability to take advantage of my slip, was that you are going to mulct serving soldiers every week, every month, and every year of their service you are going to collect money from them by stopping it out of their wages, whether they want to pay it or not, and then, if these men, after serving their country in one of the Dominions or Colonies or in some other place abroad, marry out there, as many of them do, and have children out there, they have to pay
during all those years and are going to receive nothing at all for it. It may be all right—although it is doubtful—under the Act of 1911, where something is given without people paying for it, to make all these rules and difficulties in obtaining their benefit, but any insurance company that ventured to go to the public of this country and say, "Pay us so much a week, and then, after you have paid it for years and years, we will decide if your moral character and the place where you live entitle you to receive the pension," would do very bad business. I would suggest to the Minister in charge of the Bill that it is most unfair to take advantage of the State's authority to levy compulsory contributions in this very unfair method of State trading. I also want the right hon. Gentleman to give us some reply to the question raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Peckham (Mr. Dalton). He wanted to know what was going to happen to an Irish woman who had lived here with her husband, perhaps both of them having paid insurance contributions for a very long time. The husband dies and the woman voluntarily goes back to her parents in Ireland, and the Government step in and say, "We have collared your money, but we are not going to give you any kind of pension for it just because you choose to live in Northern Ireland, where your parents are, instead or in England." It seems to me if any commercial company adopted that method of carrying on business, we should be united in stigmatising it accurately as barefaced robbery. What we would not permit in commercial companies under our jurisdiction, we should certainly not permit ourselves to inflict upon the hapless electorate of the country. The same thing, of course, applies to people who, after spending their years in British industry, giving at least as much to British industry as they take out, wish, as many old people do, to return to their birthplace when they are getting old. Are those people, if they want to go back to their country, to be robbed of their pension under a mean and pettifogging Act of this description? I hope, if the Government are going to persist in the Clause, they will at least meet us and give us a straightforward reason for doing so, and not merely shelter behind meaning-
less debating points which do credit neither to their skill nor to their kindness of heart.

Mr. RILEY: I wish to call attention to a case to which it seems to me the Government cannot have given adequate consideration. It is the case of the many thousands of Englishmen who, particularly during the War, made connections and associations with foreigners in Belgium, France and Germany and married Belgian, French or German women and have since then settled down in this country with their wives. What is the Government going to do? As the Clause now stands, it would appear that the widows of all these men, thousands of them, when they lose their husbands, it may be at 50 or 60 years of age, desire to go back to spend the remainder of their lives with their people and they have no pension at all. Upon what ground can a Clause of that kind be defended, particularly in view of the fact that the husband has to contribute during the whole of his working life, and the widow at the end finds that she has to be tied down absolutely to remain in this country, though she may have no friend or relations here? I do not see how that can possibly be defended—depriving a widow of that class of the right to a pension to which her husband contributed. Then you have the case of young men marrying Belgian, French or German women coming and settling down in industry, working and paying the contributions, and in many cases the wives themselves go into industry, and are liable, of course, for the insurance contribution. Under the Clause as it stands that type of person will be deprived entirely of benefit unless she elects to stay in this country after her husband has died. You have also the case, for instance, of the large number of Belgians in particular who came over to this country shortly after the outbreak of the War and were occupied in trade here. Many of them remained after the War, marrying possibly women from Belgium but spending the whole of their industrial life in this country, paying the contributions, and when the husband dies, the wife is compelled to remain there without friends or relations. That is an aspect of the Clause which is entirely unjustifiable and the Government should make some arrangements to meet it.

Mr. LEES-SMITH: I should like to assist subsequent discussion by putting before the Parliamentary Secretary a point he might deal with on another Amendment but arising out of the Attorney-General's speech. The Attorney-General gave us a comparison which is entirely erroneous. He compared this Bill with the Old Age Pension Bill of 1911. There was another Bill in 1911, the National Insurance Bill, and we have been told over and over again that this Bill is modelled on the provisions of the National Insurance Act. I should like to know why the Attorney-General took the comparison from the Old Age Pensions Act and not from the National Insurance Act. Under the National Insurance Act this very case is dealt with. If a member of a. society emigrates, arrangements are made by which, if he joins a foreign society which gives a similar benefit, he can go with his transfer value. That, I know, breaks down because there are no such foreign societies, but by the next Section such a member, if he wishes, can have his transfer value placed to his account as a deposit contributor and can withdraw that sum if he is so inclined. That is the parallel and I should like to know why the right hon. Gentleman chooses the Od Age Pensions Act of 1911 and not the National Insurance Act, 1911. The difficulty in the National Insurance Act now is that most of these emigrants do not know their rights and do not therefore draw this money. But the money is there if they wish to obtain it, and surely the proper procedure is to adopt the principle of the National Insurance Act and say that in such a cafe those who come under the provision should know their rights and obtain their money.

Mr. OLIVER: The inference to be drawn from the Attorney-General's observations is that pensioners who reside abroad must of necessity have some other means whereby they support themselves. Many engineering firms in this country are opening out in different parts of the world. In the engineering trade in particular, a company with which I was associated for many years have opened a place in France and also a place in the United States. What is going to happen to these people who have contributed for their pensions? If they go to reside in
the United States or in Paris, are they going to be denied this pension, for which they have been paying no doubt for many years? I would like the Attorney-General to apply himself to that point and, if possible, give an answer.

Sir K. WOOD: I would like to make one or two observations on statements of hon. Gentlemen opposite to clear up one or two matters so far as this Clause is concerned. I want to make it perfectly clear that, from the point of view of the administration of the scheme, it is obviously impossible to deal with such cases as were mentioned by the hon. Gentleman opposite. He gave an instance of someone who had contributed in this country for some time and married a Belgian and then went to live in Belgium. Subject to the qualification I am going to make,. I know of no pension scheme, private or public, which would permit of people going abroad in that way.

Mr. RILEY: I think the hon. Gentleman does not understand. There is the the case of the English soldier coming back from Belgium, settling down in this country for the remainder of his life, paying contributions, and when the husband dies, his wife, who was a Belgian woman, goes back to Belgium. Her husband has paid for her pension.

Sir K. WOOD: I quite see the point. The answer to that is that the pension was paid for subject to the conditions of the scheme. The Belgian woman, in marrying a British man, becomes a British subject, and it would be impossible for us to administer a scheme of this kind to people dotted up and down various Continental cities. It is practically an impossibility. I think we must have some regard to the administration of the scheme. How could any scheme which we set up in this country be administered in the case of the lady to whom the hon. Gentleman has just referred? She has gone back to Belgium, another woman has probably gone to France. It would be impossible for any scheme to be administered under those conditions. We would not know whether the conditions of the scheme were being fulfilled. It is for that reason that we are bound to make conditions with people who come into the scheme. I am only dealing with the point of view of the Belgian woman who marries a British man.

Mr. RILEY: They could apply for the benefit.

Sir K. WOOD: If a woman living in Belgium obtained the benefits from this country, how is she going to get them, and how are we, from the point of view of administering this scheme, to see that she is complying with the conditions of the scheme? We could not say in the case of a woman living in Belgium or France if these conditions are being complied with. It is unfortunate, if you like, but obviously any machine would break down if you saddled on to it administration in regard to women in every country under the sun. I want to point out to the Committee a matter which at any rate I think will mitigate the position. I do not myself regard this as a hardship. I think people who insure under a British scheme must comply with the conditions which would be imposed by any scheme whether contributory or non-contributory. I believe, if this were a non-contributory scheme, that it would be equally impossible to administer it to people living in any other country. Obviously it must be part of any British scheme, contributed to by employers and employés, that it must be administered in such a fashion that we can see the conditions are being complied with. Obviously we cannot see that the conditions are being complied with if people are living abroad. I am impressed with two matters which I shall mention and I think we shall have to see what can be done. I am impressed with the case of, say, a soldier maintaining his wife abroad, as in some cases happens, and, we will say, he dies. What is the position of his widow? Is she to be deprived of the pension or not? I think in the great majority of cases obviously the widow will return immediately to this country and she will then be in receipt of the pension. There may be a few cases which I myself would be very anxious to meet. In a case where a man has served his country and is quite properly under the regulations, I would like to see if possible if anything could be done. Clause 34 does give power to the Minister to remove difficulties in certain cases and I hope this may be so dealt with. I will look and see whether that is sufficient and whether there is any possibility of helping that very small class. Most Members of the Committee
will agree that in 99 cases out of 100 when the man dies under such unfortunate circumstances, the woman returns here. She will receive a pension.
There is the case also of Northern Ireland. We have a new Clause on the Paper, on page 1712, which is entitled:
Provisions as to reciprocal arrangements with other parts of His Majesty's Dominions.
That gives us power, which I hope will be put into force where other Dominions have made pensions arrangements such as our own, whereby we shall be able to make the necessary arrangements by which people can transfer from one scheme to another. I do not know myself of any particular scheme which has been set up by the Dominions at the moment and, of course, Northern Ireland will come under this Regulation, but in the event of any Dominion setting up a scheme of this kind it will give power to the Minister to make reciprocal arrangements between the two schemes. So that, if a man goes from this country to, say, Canada, he will then be able, under arrangements which we shall make, to have his benefits and liabilities transferred. That is an arrangement which we have already on the Paper and I hope something may be done. So far as Northern Ireland is concerned, we already have had some conversations and negotiations on this aspect of the matter. That really is simply the position under the proposals of the Bill. I do not think there is anything unfair. We have to administer a British scheme subject to British conditions. An hon. Gentleman said the Old Age Pensions Act was not a fair example and talked about National Health Insurance. The only difference between our suggestion and theirs is in connexion with people being allowed to take some small sum from a deposit ac-count. As he knows, Section 19 of the National Health Insurance Act. 1924, says that subject to the provisions of that Section a person shall not be entitled to any benefit during any period in which he is resident temporarily or permanently outside the United Kingdom. Broadly speaking, this is on the lines of that Act, because of necessity it must be so. If we had to make an arrangement such as the hon. Gentleman indicated, by which people could take a small sum from a deposit account, it would simply mean
additional cost to this scheme which has not been provided for. I think it better not to complicate the scheme with a provision of that kind. In this Bill we have to take up the broad principle that, while dealing with the cases I have mentioned, if a person does go to reside permanently abroad, it is impossible to administer benefit to them. The Committee may disagree with the views I have put forward, but I hope after the statement made by the Attorney-General and myself in complete explanation of the position, that, in the interest of the progress of the Bill, they will come to a decision now.

Amendment negatived.

The CHAIRMAN: In view of the explanation that has been given, I think the point of the Amendment of the hon. and learned Member for Londonderry (Sir M. Macnaghten) is covered in the new Clause which is to be proposed, but if the hon. and learned Member wishes to raise the point now, he would be in order.

Sir M. MACNAGHTEN: I beg to move, in page 21, line 14, after the word "Britain" to insert the words "or Northern Ireland."
Under this Bill men serving in the Ulster Regiments are compulsorily insured. The widows and children of these men will in most cases be resident in Northern Ireland and if no reciprocal arrangement be made with Northern Ireland, such as the Parliamentary Secretary hag suggested may be made, these widows and orphans will under this clause as drawn, be deprived of all benefit unless they abandon their homes and come to live in Great Britain. I hope the Minister will take into favourable consideration the point that these people ought to receive the prescribed benefits whether the reciprocal arrangements is or is not made. There is no reason why the men of the Ulster Regiments and their widows and children should be subjected to a disability in regard to benefits to which the men of the English and Scottish Regiments are not subjected.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I have great hopes that the new Clause on page 1712, which we propose to move, will meet the point raised by the hon. and learned Member, because I have great
hopes that Northern Ireland will be able to make some scheme similar to this. I appreciate the points raised by the hon. and learned Member. Under the circumstances, I hope he will not press the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. CECIL WILSON: I beg to move, on page 21, line 14, after the word "Britain" to insert the words "and not in any of His Majesty's Dominions."
The Parliamentary Secretary has stated that there was no parallel case for pensions being paid outside the British Isles. In quoting the National Health Insurance Act, 1924, he forgot that in the Pensions (Increase) Act, 1924, we have a Section which provides for the payment of increased pensions to persons residing outside the British Islands. If there is one scheme already in operation which provides for a payment of pensions in any part of the world, it is not too much to ask that this Bill should be extended to the British Dominions.

Captain WATERHOUSE: The Committee appreciates the difficulty in dealing with foreign countries, but I do not think that there need be any difficulty in dealing with our Colonies and Dominions. We always have a certain organisation there in connection with docks and naval bases, and I am sure that our Dominions would be only too glad to facilitate any arrangements by which residents in their territory will receive weekly or monthly subsidies from this country. We ought to try to encourage widows to take their children to the Dominions, and I would rather see the pension doubled to these people than taken away from them. We should do everything we can to encourage women who are so unfortunate as to lose their husbands when on service in the Dominions or Colonies, to stay out there, provided the climate is suitable. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will sympathetically consider this matter, and see whether it is not possible to provide an additional attraction, and not put an additional burden on a widow, who wishes to take her children out into the Empire.

Mr. J. BAKER: I want to draw the attention of the Minister to the fact that this is the narrowest definition of residence we have in either of the Acts involved in the passing of this Bill. Where
is the Isle of Man for the purpose of this Bill, or the Shetland Isles, the Orkney Isles or the Channel Islands? Approved societies have members in this country who are recommended a change of air for the good of their health by a medical officer, and they can grant permission for the insured person to go abroad, or to go to Northern Ireland, and they can and do administer their benefits in respect of those persons. Large numbers of Irish people come over here to work, and pay contributions, and there is nothing more natural than when these men are unemployed, or when they grow old, they should desire to go home to their own country. We have a decision by the Court of Referees under the Unemployment Insurance Act that an Irishman working on the Clyde and paying contributions on the Clyde, and during trade depression going home to Northern Ireland, is available for work on the Clyde and entitled to unemployment benefit and receive his unemployment pay. I think the Minister should not be quite so keen on restrictive provisions, as they appear to me to be, in this Bill, and that he ought to give us at least a broader definition of Great Britain.

Mr. HARRIS: I appreciate the difficulty in which the Minister is, but it should not pass the wit of man to devise words which will deal with this very important problem. As the Bill stands, widows who would be entitled to this pension are to be penalised for emigrating to other parts of the British Empire I always like to regard the British Empire as one, and I understood that the policy of the Government, at a time like this, with such a large number of persons unemployed, was that persons should be encouraged to emigrate to other parts of His Majesty's Dominions. By this Bill the Minister unwittingly is imposing a penalty on a certain section of the community who emigrate to Australia, Canada or New Zealand, and the case is not similar to that of old age pensions, because, at any rate, they have paid in part for their pensions by their contributions. If the Minister cannot make a concession on these lines something should be done to provide for a surrender value. It is thoroughly unsound to suggest that a person enjoying these benefits should be severely penalised for carrying out what is largely the
policy of His Majesty's Government to increase the movement of our population to our Dominions.

Sir K. WOOD: In answer to the questions put to me, I am informed on good authority that the Shetland Islands are part of Scotland and the Scilly Islands are part of England, and that, so far as the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man are concerned, if they wish to participate, they would have to formulate a scheme of their own before reciprocal arrangements could be made. It is not through any desire to prevent the payment of benefit to people who go to these places that we oppose this Amendment, but for the simple reason, which I endeavoured to indicate a little while ago, the difficulties of administration. I think that the Committee as a whole would be anxious to encourage people to go to our Dominions and let them have the pension, but if the hon. Member would for a moment put himself in the position of those who administer this scheme, he will see that if you were simply to say, "You are to pay the pension to anyone going to Canada or Australia," the scheme, so far as they are concerned, would break down to-morrow.
What we are endeavouring to do in the Amendment which my right hon. Friend has put on the Paper is to encourage the Dominions to make schemes of their own, so that we can have reciprocal arrangements. That may be a slower method of getting to the goal, but fast methods are often rather dangerous. When the Committee come to make a decision they have to have regard to the people who make the contributions, and to the fact that we have to make safeguards so far as they are concerned. The hon. Member suggested why not make an arrangement about people having benefit as a deposit contributor. Our experience of National Health Insurance shows that that is practically a dead letter. This Amendment is endeavouring to safeguard a very small portion of the people. Obviously so far as old age pensioners are concerned they will not go to the Dominions. They will stay here. There would be only an infinitesimal number and the administrative difficulties make it practically impossible. No one can say that the pension would be properly paid in Canada and Australia unless reciprocal arrangements were made
with the Dominions. For these reasons we have again to ask the Committee to reject this Amendment.

Captain WATERHOUSE: Would not the Government think of a lump sum payment?

Sir K. WOOD: Once you give a lump sum payment, it must be taken from the contributions of other people. I have endeavoured to put my own personal views forward, that pensioners must abide by the condition that they should draw

their pensions in this country. I am very anxious to promote reciprocal arrangements with the Dominions, and I believe that the best way would be to encourage them to formulate schemes such as this. Directly you give a lump sum or a surrender value it means that you must take the money from those who contribute in this country.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 138; Noes, 247.

Division No.s 278.]
AYES.
[9.55 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hartshorn. Rt. Hon. Vernon
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. B., Eland)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hay day, Arthur
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Amman, Charles George
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Sandon, Lord


Attlee, Clement Richard
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scrymgeour, E.


Baker, J. (Wolverhamton, Bilston)
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootie)
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, G. H.
Sexton, James


Barnes, A.
Hirst, w. (Bradford, South)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Pretton)


Barr, J.
Holt, Capt. H. p.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Batey, Joseph
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sitch, Charles H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bromley, J.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Snell, Harry


Buchanan. G.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Charietron, H. C.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stamford, T. W.


Clowes, S.
Kelly, W. T.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Cluse, W. S.
Kennedy, T.
Taylor, R. A.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Compton, Joseph
Kirk wood, D.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middiesbro, W.)


Connolly, M.
Lawson, John James
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Cove, W. G.
Lee, F.
Thurtle, E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lindley, F. W.
Tinker, John Joseph


Dalton, Hugh
Livingstone, A. M.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lowth, T.
Viant, S. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lunn. William
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dennison, R.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Warne, G. H.


Duncan, C.
Mackinder, W.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
MacLaren, Andrew
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Forrest, W.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gibbins, Joseph
March, S.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Gosling, Harry
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Westwood, J.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Morris. R. H.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Greenall, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Whiteley, W.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Naylor, T. E.
Wiggins, William Martin


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Oliver, George Harold
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gretton, Colonel John
Owen, Major G.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Groves, T.
Paling, W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Potts, John S.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Wright, W.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Riley, Ben



Hardie, George D.
Ritson, J.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Harris. Percy A.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
 Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Allen Parkinson.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Brass, Captain W.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Bethell, A.
Briggs, J. Harold


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Briscoe, Richard George


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Brocklebank, C. E. R.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Blades, Sir George Rowland
Broun-Lindsay. Major H.


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Blundell, F. N.
Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C,(Berks, Newb'y)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Bullock, Captain M.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Burman, J. B.


Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Burton, Colonel H. W,
Hammersley, S. S.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Philipson, Mabel


Butt, Sir Alfred
Harland, A,
Pielou, D. p.


Campbell, E. T.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Pilcher, G.


Cassels, J. D.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Harvey, Majors. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Preston, William


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Haslam, Henry C.
Price, Major C. W. M


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
 Hawke, John Anthony
Raine, W.


Cazalet, Captain victor A.
Henderson, Capt. R.R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Rawson, Alfred Cooper


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Remer, J. R.


Chapman, Sir S.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Rentoul, G. S.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Rice, Sir Frederick


Chlicott, Sir Warden
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Christie, J. A.
Homan, C. W. J.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)


Clarry, Reginald George
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Ropner, Major L.


Clayton, G. C.
Hope, Sir Harry (Fortar)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hopkins, J w. w.
Rye. F. G.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Cope, Major William
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Couper, J. B.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Savery, S. S.


Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hume, Sir G. H.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Croft. Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hurst, Gerald B.
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Crook, C. W.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Sinclair, Col. T.(Queen's Univ., Belfst)


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Jacob, A. E.
Skelton, A. N.


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Galnsbro)
Jephcott, A. R.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Smith, R.W. (Aberd'n & Kino'dine. C.)


Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Smithers, Waldron


Dalkeith, Earl of
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Somerville, A, A. (Windsor)


Dalziel, Sir Davison
Lamb, J. O.
Spender Clay, Colonel H.


Davidson, J.(Hertl'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Loder, J. de V.
Storry Deans, R.


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Looker, Herbert William
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W H.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Lougher, L.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Dixey, A. C.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Drewe, C.
MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
McLean, Major A.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Elveden, Viscount
Macmillan, Captain H.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Everard, W. Lindsay
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Fairfax, Captain J, G.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Waddingon, R.


Fielden, E. B.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Finburgh, S.
Marriott, sir J. A. R.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Fleming, D. P.
Meller, R. J.
Warner, Brigadier-Genera! W. W.


Ford, P. J.
Merriman, F. B.
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Wells, S. R.


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Fraser, Captain Ian
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Frantis E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Ganzoni, Sir John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Gates, Percy
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Gauit, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wise, Sir Fredric


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Nelson, Sir Frank
Wolmer, Viscount


Goff, Sir Park
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Womersley, w. J.


Gower, Sir Robert
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Grace, John
Nuttall, Ellis
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Oakley, T.
Wragg, Herbert


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)



Grotrian, H. Brent
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Captain Margesson and Captain


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Penny, Frederick George
Douglas Hacking.


Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
Perring, William George

Mr. DAVIES: I beg to move, in page 21, line 15, to leave out paragraph (b).
We have had an explanation from the Parliamentary Secretary to the effect that the Clause as it stands means that if a person resides outside the United
Kingdom for a period of over three months, when he returns he is entitled to only three months' arrears. I fully appreciate that when a person is permanently resident outside Great Britain there is a difficulty of administration, but I fail to understand what difficulty of administra-
tion arises if a person is outside Great Britain for three, six, nine or even 12
months. I would give as an illustration in favour of my point, the case of the person who falls ill under the National Health Insurance scheme. Where a person falls ill under that scheme and is without dependents, he may enter an institution in this country or in any other country and remain in that institution for two or three years. When he comes out of that institution he can claim the whole of the benefits. That point is a very strong one.
This Clause would seem to be capable of a rendering that is not meant. The Clause reads:
A sum shall not be paid on account of a pension—

(a) to or in respect of any person while that person is absent from Great Britain; or
(b) if payment of the sum is not obtained within three months after the date on which it has become payable."


I feel sure that it is not the intention of the Clause to deprive the claimant to a portion of that pension, if three months elapse before the first demand is made for the pension. But if anyone desires to read into the Clause the meaning that if a pensioner, claiming the benefit for the first time, does not obtain the benefit within three months, the claim would fall to the ground because he did not obtain the benefit within three months, that meaning could be read into it.

Sir K. WOOD: I suppose everyone may differ as to the exact period laid down. The hon. Gentleman himself, by implication, said there must be a period of some sort. We must, from the point of view of administration, have some period fixed, and we think three months is a very reasonable period. I think it is a generous and not an unfair one. Many inquiries will have to be made, and, in fixing the period of three months, you are doing a fair thing by the insured person, and not inflicting undue inconvenience on the administration.

Mr. DAVIES: The hon. Gentleman rather invited me to make a suggestion. I see there is an Amendment down to make it six months. Will he
consider the acceptance of Chat Amendment?

Mr. PALING: As the hon. Member has pointed out, three months is a very short period. The hon. Member opposite said, in reply to the last Amendment, that not many people receiving the old age pension would go abroad.

Sir K. WOOD: I meant permanently. Of course, this contemplates temporary absence.

Mr. PALING: At the present moment we are doing all we can to encourage men and women to emigrate, and we do not-put anything in the way of emigration to other countries, too. There are thousands of men and women going out of this country to our Colonies. They may do fairly well, but not well enough to enable them to pay a visit home. On the other hand, they may leave parents here who, under this scheme, come into pension at 65. They have not earned enough while working to be able to afford to visit their sons and daughters abroad, but at 65 years of age, it may be that, with the small sum they have saved, and with the possibility of pension coming in, they would be able to pay a visit to their sons or daughters in the Colonies, and I think the hon. Gentleman will admit that three months in a case like that would be a very short period. I am sure he would be one of the last to wish to stop those visits. This limitation of three months would impose hardships on people of that description in scores of cases, and I am sure if the hon. Gentleman could be assured that one case of hardship or a dozen cases were to occur by inserting this period of three months, he would agree to lengthen the period. I do not think there is any question of administrative difficulty. The money need not be paid, but if the old people knew that while they were away the money was accumulating, and, on their return, would be paid to them, in many cases it would make the whole difference between going and staying at home

Mr. WALLHEAD: The Parliamentary Secretary stands at the Treasury Box and beams beatifically at the Opposition, but has not advanced any argument against the Amendment. I must continually insist that people should not be deprived of benefits after paying for what
they have a right to expect. While one may agree there are limits which must be set up, if the hon. Gentleman will accept six months instead of three months, I think we might agree that there should be no further Division on the point. I ask him to use his influence with his chief, who is as kind-hearted as he is himself, and does not, I am sure, want to do any injustice. I am not charging him with that, but I think there will be an injustice

if this period of three months be insisted upon. Therefore, I suggest that the Government agree to six months.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out, to the word ' obtained,' in page 21, line 15, stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 258; Noes, 125.

Division No. 279.]
AYES.
110.15 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Dalkeith, Earl of
Holt, Captain H. P.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Dalziel, Sir Davison
Homan, C. W. J.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J, (Warw'k, Nun.)


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby) 
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. w.
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon, Stanley
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hume, Sir G. H.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hurst, Gerald B.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Drewe, C.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Benn, sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)


Bethell, A.
Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Jacob, A. E.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Elliot, Captain Walter E,
Jephcott. A. R.


Bird. E. R. (Yorks, W. R., skipton)
Elveden, viscount
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Erskine, Lord [Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston).


Blundell, F. N.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Kindersley, Major Guy M.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement


Bowyer, Captain G. E. W.
Fielden, E. B.
Lamb, J. Q.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Finburgh, S.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Brass, Captain W.
Fleming, D. P.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Briggs, J. Harold
Ford, P. J,
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Briscoe, Richard George
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Loder, J. de V.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Forrest, W.
Looker, Herbert William


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Lougher, L.


Broun-Lindsay. Major H.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Brown, Maj. D.C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Fraser, Captain Ian
MacAndrew, Charles Glen


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Bullock. Captain M.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
McLean, Major A.


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Ganzoni, Sir John
Macmillan, Captain H.


Burman J. B.
Gates, Percy
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Mac Robert, Alexander M.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Maitland. Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Butt, Sir Alfred
Goff, Sir Park
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Campbell, E. T.
Gower, Sir Robert
Meller, R. J.


Cassels, J. D.
Grace, John 
Merriman, F. B.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Greene, W, p. Crawford
Meyer, Sir Frank


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, city)
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Gretton, Colonel John
Mitchell, S. (Lanark. Lanark)


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com Rt. Hon. B. M.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Moore, Sir Newton J.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R. (Eastbourne)
Moreing, Captain A, H.


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)


Christie, J. A.
Hammersley, S. S.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Clarry, Reginald George
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Newman, Sir R. H. S. O. L. (Exeter)


Clayton, G. C.
Harland, A.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Harrison, G. J. C.
Nuttall, Ellis


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Oakley, T.


Cockerill, Brigadler General G. K.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Haslam, Henry C.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Cope, Major William
Hawke, John Anthony
Ormsby-Core, Hon. William


Couper, J. B.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Owen, Major G.


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Penny, Frederick George


Crook, C. W.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Perring, William George


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Philipson, Mabel


Curtis Bernett, Sir Henry
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Pielou, D. P.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Pilcher, G.


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Preston, William
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Price Major C. W. M.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Raine, W.
Skelton, A. N.
Watts, Dr. T.


Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Wells, S. R.


Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Smith, R.W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Rees, Sir Beddoe
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Smithers, Waldron
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Remer, J. R.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Rentoul, G. S.
Spender Clay, Colonel H.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Rice, Sir Frederick
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stretford)
Starry Deans, R.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Ropner, Major L.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Strickland, Sir Gerald
Wolmer, Viscount


Rye, F. G.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
Womersley, W. J.


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Sanderson, Sir Frank
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Sandon, Lord
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.
Wragg, Herbert


Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Waddington, R.



Savery, S. S.
Wallace, Captain D. E.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mol. (Renfrew, W.)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)
Lord Stanley and Captain




Margesson.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Harris, Percy A.
Scrymgeour, E.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Sexton, James


Ammon, Charles George
Hayday, Arthur
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hirst, G. H.
Sitch, Charles H.


Barnes, A.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Barr, J.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Batey, Joseph
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Snell, Harry


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stamford, T. W.


Broad, F. A.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Stephen. Campbell


Bromley, J.
Kelly, W. T.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Charleton, H. C.
Kennedy, T.
Taylor, R. A.


Clowes, S.
Kirkwood, D.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Cluse, W. S.
Lawson, John James
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Lee, F.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Compton, Joseph
Lindley, F. W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Connolly, M.
Lowth, T.
Thurtle, E.


Cove, W. G.
Lunn, William
Tinker, John Joseph


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Trevelyan. Rt. Hon. C. P.


Dalton, Hugh
Mackinder, W.
Viant, S. P.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
MacLaren, Andrew
Wallhead, Richard C.


Cay, Colonel Harry
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


Dennison, R.
March, S.
Watts-Morgan, Lt-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Duncan, C.
Maxton, James
Westwood, J.


Fenby, T. D.
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Gibbins, Joseph
Morris, R. H.
Whiteley, W.


Gillett, George M.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, North)
Wiggins, William Martin


Gosling, Harry
Naylor, T. E.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Greenall, T.
Paling, W.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Groves, T.
Potts, John S.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Grundy, T. W.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Windsor, Walter


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Riley, Ben
Wright, W.


Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Ritson, J.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O.(W. Bromwich)



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Hardle, George D.
Salter, Dr. Alfred
 Warne.

Mr. BARNES: I beg to move, in page 21, line 15, to leave out the word "obtained," and to insert instead thereof the words "applied for."
This Amendment will give the Minister an opportunity of explaining the term "&c." which follows the marginal note "Residential qualification of pensioners." Sufficient has been said on this Clause to
indicate that delay may occur on the part of the Department, arid if that should be the case, I do not see that the pensioners should have any rights denied them because of such delay. My Amendment rather aims at making it, clear that, pro viding the application is in for any sums due, delay on the part of the Department should not deprive pensioners of their rights.

Sir K. WOOD: I am glad to give the hon. Member an assurance on that point. The Clause says
if payment …. is not obtained within three months after the date on which it has become payable,
and the date on which the pension becomes payable is, of course, the date on which the application has been made. Therefore, if there is any delay on the part of the Department in proving claims, it dates back to the time when the application was made. In fact, in another part of the Bill we take power to make a sort of advance pending the proving of claims, but my hon. Friend can be assured that the pension becomes payable from the time when the person makes the application, provided, of course, that all is in order.

Mr. HARRIS: I would point out that this Clause gives very limited rights to these people who have a legal claim on the Fund, The opening words are: "A sum shall not be paid on account of a pension," and now you are setting up a very elaborate organisation to deal with, not a small section of the community, but the greater part of the community, that is coming within the purview of the Bill. I think that these insured persons want more protection than these words seem to provide. There wants to be very much more discretion to pay this money in case of hardship, incase of failure to apply owing to ignorance, or other circumstances, and it seems to me that, as now worded, with only three months allowed for sustaining a claim, and no discretion left to the

Minister, there is not adequate protection to the persons insured. After all, these sums are not given by way of gratuity; they are sums to which these people are entitled. Therefore, we have an obligation to provide them not only with the money, but with ample safeguards.

Mr. BARNES: After what has been said, I ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Captain BOURNE: I beg to move, in page 21, line 16, to leave out the word "three" and to insert instead thereof the word "six."
I do not want to detain the Committee at present, so I shall simply move the Amendment.

Sir K. WOOD: I am afraid I can add nothing to the arguments I have addressed to the Committee—

Mr. WALLHEAD: You have used no arguments at all!

Sir K. WOOD: Then let me say "observations." The observations that I made previously as to leaving out "six" and inserting "twelve" might be as well addressed to this particular Amendment. We believe the period in the Clause to be a reasonable one, and I trust that my hon. and gallant Friend will accept that view.

Question put, "That the word 'three' stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 252; Noes, 134.

Division No. 280.]
AYES.
[10.30 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Briscoe, Richard George
Chilcott, Sir Warden


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Christie, J. A.


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Clarry, Reginald George


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W, Derby)
Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Clayton, G. C.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Astbury, Lieut.-Commander F. W.
Bullock, Captain M.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Burman, J. B.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Barclay-Harvey. C. M.
Burney, Lieut.-Com. Charles D.
Cope, Major William


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Burton, Colonel H. W.
Couper, J. B.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Cralk, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry


Bethell, A.
Butt, Sir Alfred
Crook, C. W.


Birchall, Major J, Dearman
Campbell, E. T.
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)


Bird, E. R (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Cassels, J. D.
Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert


Blundell, F. N.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Curzon, Captain Viscount


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Chadwick, sir Robert Burton
Dalkeith, Earl of


Boyd-Carpentor, Major A.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Dalziel, Sir Davison


Brass, Captain W.
Chapman, Sir S.
Davidson, J.(Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)


Briggs, J. Harold
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Price, Major C. W. M.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Raine, W.


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Dawson, Sir Philip
Hume, Sir G. H.
Rawson, Alfred Copper


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hurst, Gerald B.
Reid, Capt. A S. C. (Warrington)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Remer, J. R.


Drewe, C.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Rentoul, G. S.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Rice, Sir Frederick


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Jacob, A. E.
Roberts, Samuel (Herelord, Hereford)


Elveden, Viscount
Jephcott, A. R.
Ropner, Major L.


England, Colonel A.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Rye, F. G.


Everard, W. Lindsay
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Salmon, Major I.


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnhan)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Lamb, J. O.
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Fermcy, Lord
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Sandon, Lord


Fielden, E. B.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Finburgh, S.
Lockor-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Savery, S. S.


Fleming, D. P.
Loder, J. de V.
Shaw, Lt-Col. A. D, Mol. (Renfrew, W.)


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Looker, Herbert William
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Foster, Sir Harry S.
Lougher, L.
Simms, Dr. Joan M. (Co. Down)


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)


Fraser, Captain Ian
MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Skelton, A. N.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Galbraith, J. F. W.
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n& Kinc'dine, C.)


Ganzoni, Sir John
McLean. Major A.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Gates, Percy
Macmillan, Captain H.
Smithers, Waldron


Gault, Lieut.-Col. Andrew Hamilton
Macnaghten, Hon. sir Malcolm
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Spender Clay, Colonel H.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Gott, Sir Park
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Gower, Sir Robert
Margesson, Captain D.
Storry Deans, R.


Grace, John
Marriott. Sir J. A. R.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Meller, R. J.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Merriman, F. B.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Grotrian, H. Brent
Meyer, Sir Frank
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Gretton, Colonel John
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Waddington, R.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. S. M.
Ward. Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R.(Eastbourne)
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Warner, Brigadler-General W. W.


Hall, Capt. W. D'A. (Brecon & Rad.)
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hammersley, S. S.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Watts, Dr. T.


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Wells, S. R.


Harland, A.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Harrison, G. J. C.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Harvey, G. (Lambeth, Kennington)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Wilson, Sir c. H. (Leeds, Central)


Haslam, Henry C.
Nuttall, Ellis
Wilson. R. R (Stafford, Lichfield)


Hawke, John Anthony
Oakley, T.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Wise, Sir Fredric


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Penny, Frederick George
Wolmer. Viscount


Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Porring, William George
Womersley, W. J.


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset. Bridgwater)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Phillpson, Mabel
Wragg, Herbert


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Pleiou, D. P.



Holt, Captain H. P.
Pilcher, G.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Homan, C. W. J.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Lord


Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Preston, William
Stanley.


Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W, (Fife, West)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Greenall, T.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Compton, Joseph
Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Connolly, M.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Ammon, Charles George
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Grundy, T. W.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Dalton, Hugh
Guest. J. (York, Hemsworth)


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southward, N.)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Day, Colonel Harry
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)


Barnes, A.
Dennison, R.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Barr, J.
Duncan, C.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)


Batey, Joseph
Edwards, c. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Hardle, George D.


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Harney, E, A.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Harris, Percy A.


Broad, F. A.
Fenby, T. D.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon


Bromley, J
Forrest, W.
Hastings, Sir Patrick


Buchanan, G.
Gibbins, Joseph
Hayday, Arthur


Charleton, H. C.
Gillett, George M.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)


Clowes, S.
Gosling, Harry
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)


Cluse, W. S.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Hirst, G. H.




Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Paling, W.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro, W.)


Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Potts, John S.
Thurtle, E.


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Tinker, John Joseph


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Kelly, W. T.
Riley, Ben
Viant, S. P.


Kennedy, T.
Ritson, J.
Warne, G. H.


Kirkwood, D.
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


Lawson, John James
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
Watts-Morgan. Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Lee, F.
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)
Westwood, J.


Lindley, F. W.
Robinson, W. C.(Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Livingstone, A. M.
Saller, Dr. Alfred
Whiteley, W.


Lowth, T.
Scrymgeour, E.
Wiggins, William Martin


Lunn, William
Scurr, John
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Sexton, James
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)


Mackinder, W.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


MacLaren, Andrew
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


March, S.
Sitch, Charles H.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Maxton, James
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Windsor, Walter


Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Snell, Harry
Wright, W.


Morris, R. H.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Stamford, T. W.



Naylor, T. E.
Stephen, Campbell
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Oliver, George Harold
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)
Mr. Wallhead and Mr. Groves.


Owen, Major G.
Taylor, R. A.



Question, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Clause ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 23.—(Residential qualification of persons in respect of whose insurance pensions are payable.)

Amendments made: In page 21, line 23, after the word "pensions," insert the words "under or by virtue of this Act."

In page 21, line 27, leave out the word "continuously."—[Mr. N. Chamberlain.]

Mr. LEES-SMITH: I beg to move, in page 21, line 28, to leave out the words "two years," and to insert instead thereof the words "one year."
This Clause lays down that unless a person has been continually resident in Great Britain prior to this date he loses his pension. It is considered that the two years' period provided under this Clause under any circumstances is likely to create a few hard cases, and these would be diminished if instead of two years we substitute one year.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: It is admitted that there might be a few hard cases under this provision, but if the hon. Member will look at the first part of Sub-section (1) he will find that they are "subject as may be otherwise prescribed." That ensures that conditions may be provided for under the Regulations, and I am advised that those Regulations can only be made by way of mitigating the restrictions.

Sir PATRICK HASTINGS: There is just one question that I should like to ask
on this point. Why is it that the Minister assumes that the phrase "subject as may be provided" includes Regulations? As far as I can follow this Clause, there is nothing in it that says that, but I am asking for information. [HON. MEMBERS: "Speak up!"] Why does the Minister say that there is power to make Regulations which affect Clause 23 in the sense of mitigating any hardship that might arise? It may be that there is such a power, but I confess that I do not see it.

Sir K. WOOD: It is in Clause 29 (a).

Sir P. HASTINGS: I see that, but is that really so? It says that ho may make Regulations
for prescribing the manner in which claims to a pension may be made.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Perhaps the hon. and learned Gentleman will look at paragraph (f).

Sir P. HASTINGS: It may be that paragraph (f) is wide enough to meet the difficulties. [HON. MEMBERS: "Speak up!"] If hon. Members will remain quiet, I think they will have no difficulty in hearing what I am saying. [An HON. MEMBER: "Do not be rude!"] There is one other question that I should like to ask. I quite agree that the removal of the word "continuously" has assisted very much in this Clause, but I think there may still be a very grave difficulty. I do not know whether the Attorney-General has considered it from this point of view. What, exactly, is the meaning of the provision as to a person being
resident in Great Britain for a period of two years? Supposing, for instance, that a person, at a time of pressure, were sent by his employer to somewhere like Egypt for a period of one or two months, is it intended that he should be entitled to benefit or not? I think it might be very difficult to say. It certainly might give rise to difficulty. Would such a person be resident for a period of two years if within that period he was working for an indeterminate period abroad, and was, therefore, residing abroad, for his employer, for three months or six months? I think the Attorney-General might tell us, at least, what is intended, so that we may see whether it is carried out.
I cannot help thinking that the word "resident" is a very difficult word. It means different things in almost every Statute. Whether or not a person could be said to have been resident in Great Britain for a period of two years if he had been sent abroad to work for a period of three months or six months, would, I think, be a very difficult question, and, if it is intended that a person in those circumstances is to be entitled to benefit, I cannot help thinking that it might be made a little more plain. I quite agree that the question whether it is 12 months or two years is really not of very much importance, provided that we really understand what it is that the Government intend by this provision, and, if the Attorney-General could tell us what is actually intended, it might very well be that the question of its being one year or two years might not arise.

The ATTORNEY-GENERAL: I am very glad to answer my hon. and learned Friend's question as far as I can. As he knows very well, "residence" is a term which occurs quite commonly in Acts of Parliament, and he and I have both discussed it in more than one case, especially in Income Tax cases. Certainly, in such cases as those to which he referred, of a person being sent temporarily on a job out of this country, with the intention of coming back as soon as his work was over and resuming his home in England, which, in normal cases at any rate, he would retain for his wife and family, it would. I should have thought, have been quite clear that he was resident in Great Britain all the time, and I think I could
produce authorities which would satisfy my hon. and learned Friend; but if there be any doubt in any case, then the Clause contains the provision to which attention has already been called, "subject as may be prescribed," and under paragraph. (f) of Clause 29 the Committee will find that the Minister has power to make regulations for prescribing anything which under this Act is to be prescribed. Therefore, if any difficulty should arise in interpretation such as that which the hon. and learned Gentleman was afraid of it might easily be put right by regulation, and we are not taking away the control of the House of Commons over such regulations because they have to lie on the Table of the House.

Sir P. HASTINGS: I should be quite satisfied provided that by acquiescence or otherwise the Minister assures us that it is the intention of the Government that if a man goes abroad with the intention of coming back to this country during the 12 months for a limited period of three or six months he shall be treated as a person resident in this country for two years, and if a difficulty has arisen upon it we may return to the House of Commons and ask for some regulation which will carry that into effect. If that is so, I shall be satisfied.

Mr. N. MACLEAN: A point arises here which ought to be made a little more clear than it is. There is the case of the worker employed in a Government dockvard. He may be sent out to Malta or Hong Kong. [HON. MEMBERS: "Singapore!"] He may be sent to an even warmer climate than that. He may be sent to one of the many Government dockyards and he may be there for three years. Under this Clause, if he came back he could not qualify until it became time for him to come to the pension period. He is going to be ruled out according to the reading of the Clause. I can quite follow the reason, as far as a layman can follow paragraph (f) in Clause 29, for "prescribing anything which under this Act is to be prescribed." That is rather a wide power to give the Minister of Health.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN indicated dissent.

Mr. MACLEAN: I am glad to know it is not as wide as I think it is likely to be. I should object to giving the Minister such
wide powers because hon. Members know perfectly well the complaints that have arisen and the friction that is taking place over regulations made by various Departments which operate very harshly upon the people to whom they apply. I do not feel inclined to give any wider powers to a Department than it is possible for that Department to obtain from the House. If we can lay down definitely and clearly the way to get pensions and the conditions under which they can qualify for those pensions in an Act of Parliament we shall do away entirely with any friction which will arise by regulation. I should also like to ask the Minister, if he thinks it worth while to make that point clear, whether it is his intention, before any regulations are put forward as submitted in paragraph (f), that they shall be laid before the House and may be, discussed.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I think the hon. Member is under a little misapprehension as to the meaning of Clause 29. It does not widen the power of the Minister at all. All it does is to say he may make regulations for prescribing, not anything at all, but anything which is to be prescribed under the Act. It is the Act itself, therefore, to which he should apply in order to know what are the matters as to which the Minister may make regulations. He goes on to say that, as it does not state in this Clause, and possibly elsewhere, exactly what is to be in the regulations, the Minister is given wider discretionary powers than ought to be given him. I will ask him to reflect what will be the consequences of insisting on putting into the Bill itself every kind of case. Supposing that you missed a case, suppose you do not think of anything then, in order to bring that new case into the category of the Bill, you have to pass an amending Act, whereas under the Bill there is always power for the Minister to make new Regulations to meet the case which has not been foreseen, and if he makes that Resolution he is bound to lay it on the Table of the House so that it can be considered and discussed. With regard to other points, I would remind the hon. Member once more that we are dealing here with two years prior to the date on which a man attains 65, and I do not think we must assume that large numbers of people are going to be sent out to
Hong Kong just two years before they attain 65. If there are such, they will be dealt with in the Regulations, and it is precisely to meet this class of case that it has been inserted in this Clause that the Minister be able to make Regulations for mitigating hardships that otherwise might arise.

Amendment negatived.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 21, line 38, to leave out the word "continuously."

Mr. WALLHEAD: There is an Amendment in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Oxford (Captain Bourne).

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member will see that that point is covered and the Amendment of the hon. and gallant Member for Oxford is unnecessary.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I beg to move, in page 21, line 41, at the end, to insert the words,
or, in case of a child under the age of two, since the date of birth.
In this Amendment we have anticipated a cry of another grave injustice.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. WADDINGTON: I beg to move, in page 22, line 5, at the end, to insert the words
(iii) This Section shall not apply to any insured person where the trade or profession requires such person to be temporarily employed outside Great Britain, or, where the right to a widows' or orphans' pension shall arise in respect of any insured person so employed, the widow or orphan to or in respect of whom the pension would be payable was resident outside Great Britain for a period contemporary with the employment outside Great Britain of the insured person.
The object of this Amendment is to safeguard a very large and important class of the community who consider that under the provisions of the Clause they are not safeguarded, that is the large body of men employed in the textile machinery works who have to go abroad to erect machinery and whose period away from England may be anywhere from three months to two years. That has been dealt with to some extent by discussion on previous Amendments but the words of the Clause in themselves do not give the security which is wanted. Under this
Amendment if a worker is insured his wife and child who may come for benefit as widow and orphan will be protected under the Amendment. There can be no question as to the desirability of absolutely safeguarding the rights of this class, and I hope the Minister will accept the Amendment.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: These cases are covered by the discussion which we had on the previous Amendment. Such cases, when they arise, will be dealt with by Regulations.

Mr. WADDINGTON: Subject to the assurance of the Minister that these cases are definitely covered in the Regulations which are to be prescribed, I beg leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Captain BENN: Are we going to see the Regulations before we part with the Bill? No one doubts the right hon. Gentleman's good faith, but it is a reasonable request that a draft of the Regulations should be laid before the House before the Bill goes to the Report stage. Is the Minister going to do anything of that sort?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN indicated dissent.

Mr. LEES-SMITH: Are these Regulations to be laid before the House?

Amendment, by leave withdrawn.

Major HORE-BELISHA: I beg to move, in page 22, line 8, at the end, to add
(3) This Section shall not apply to sailors, soldiers, and airmen insured under the provisions of the Act, or to other insured persons employed under the authority of the Crown.
I want a declaration made as to how sailors, soldiers and airmen will be dealt with.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: As far as the Amendment applies to service men, they will be provided for in the Regulations. If we made the suggested provision for the other persons referred to in the Amendment, we should be met with similar demands on the part of employés of private firms.

Captain BENN: Are we to understand that the whole of the men who are employed in the armed services of the Crown are simply to be dealt with under Regulations? If so, it makes it more important
that we should see something of the Minister's intentions in writing. He may, of course, refuse to answer or to lay the Regulations, but it does not seem to be reasonable.

Major HORE-BELISHA: Is it clear that these men will not be penalised in any way?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Yes.

Mr. MACLEAN: The Minister said that the Regulations would only apply to what he termed hard cases. I take it that he meant individual cases, or a small number of cases. Here we have a section who will be brought under this insurance scheme consisting of a large number of individuals, and I should imagine that instead of regulating their conditions for pensions by Regulations passed by this House, we are in duty bound to include the conditions in the Bill itself.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I do not think I said that the Regulations would apply only to a particular class of cases. I said that they would be designed to cover hard cases, and I gave a definite assurance that they are intended to cover all the cases of men who are serving in the Forces of the Crown.

Mr. MACLEAN: Are we to take it that under this Bill, instead of stating definitely and explicitly how large bodies of people are to have their particular claims for pensions adjudicated upon, they are to be dealt with merely by Regulations which will have to be debated in this House after 11o'clock at night?

11.0 P.M.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The only class of case that would require to be dealt with under these Regulations are service men, who will, according to the terms of their service, be required to be resident outside this country. Those will be the Regulations, but that does not apply to all cases of men serving in the Army.

Mr. MACLEAN: You have a very large number of men serving outside.

Mr. HARNEY: Is this, Clause to apply to soldiers, sailors and airmen insured under the provisions of this Bill? If it is not to apply to them, what is the objection to accepting the Amendment? All that the Amendment says is that it shall
not do what the right hon. Gentleman says it is not intended to do. Why not put it in black and white in the Bill?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: Because that is not all that the Amendment says. It applies to others than those serving in the forces.

Major HORE-BELISHA: Will the right hon. Gentleman accept it if the concluding portion of the Amendment is omitted?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN indicated assent.

Major HORE-BELISHA: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Amendment made: In page 22, line 8, at the end, add
(3) This Section shall not apply to sailors, soldiers, and airmen insured under the provisions of the Act."—(Major Hore-Belisha.]

The following Amendment stood on the Order Paper in the name of Lieut. -Colonel HENEAGE: In page 22, line 8, at the end, add
(3) Regulations may be made by the Minister for a reciprocal agreement with the authorities concerned in the British Dominions or Colonies whereby a portion of the qualifying period provided for under Sub-section (1) may be spent in the Dominions or Colonies.

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: Since the Amendment standing in my name has been tabled, I am glad to say that the Government has introduced a Clause embodying the main objects which this Amendment was intended to promote.
As the matter can be discussed on the Government Amendment (to be inserted after Clause 31) I do not propose to move this Amendment.

CLAUSE 24.—(Provision against double pensions.)

Mr. F. ROBERTS: I beg to move, in page 22, line 10, to leave out Subsection (1).
I move this Amendment because I feel that, if this Clause be carried into effect in the terms of the Bill, it will mean some measure of injustice so far as a large number of dependants of ex-service men are concerned. I think that the last thing that the Committee would like to
do would be to impose any hardship whatever on the dependants of those who fought in the Great War, or who have seen service with the forces of the Crown. Judged purely from the standpoint of numbers, the proposal to delete this Subsection is not without its importance. At the present moment I am told that there are something like 290,000 dependants' pensions being paid, and in addition there are thousands in the other sections of dependants at the present time. It is true that the whole of these would not come under the operation of the class included in this Bill, but a great proportion of them would. In proposing the deletion of this Sub-section, it seems to mo to be necessary to take into consideration the foundation of the dependants' pension paid in order to compensate a person for a loss of income of some kind or other. I understand that it is proposed to take dependants' pensions into account in considering the question of qualifications under the present Bill. When the dependants' pension became payable to those concerned it was based on the fact that there would be a certain loss of income from those who were called upon for service in the War or with the forces of the Crown. At present it cannot be done without interfering materially with the position that has been created out of the various War pensions Acts. Provision was made to see that there did come into the household some recompense for the loss which was incurred when the wage-earner, the husband, son. or brother, was called upon for service. The income of the family was depreciated to a very considerable extent. When the dependants' pensions were allowed they were to make good the deficiency thereby imposed.
In most of these cases we can assume that necessitous circumstances would exist: otherwise the provision would not have been made. I notice that in a portion of the sub-section the Bill proposes to exempt under certain conditions in necessitous cases. I want to ask the Minister whether it is not true to suggest that in the great majority of these dependants' cases it could be proved that there were existing necessitous circumstances? If that is proved, why is it proposed to make any provision of the kind which is intended, because if it is to be applied in the sense and spirit in which the Com-
mittee would have it done, nearly every case would claim to have exemption under the provision of the Bill now. There is no need for this sub-section whatever, and the right hon. Gentleman should leave undisturbed a just provision made for the dependants of ex-Service men within the terms of the War Pensions Acts. Many are the reasons that could be given. I ask the right hon. gentleman how will the second part of the Clause affect those who are qualified for old age pensions? May I put a simple test question? Suppose that someone has been drawing a dependant's pension of 8s. per week. Does it mean that only 2s. can then be added to the allowance to make it 10s.? If that is so, this provision is destroying all the benefit which was given to the dependants of ex-Service men. I hope that the right hon. Gentleman may see his way, if not to withdraw this sub-section, at any rate to modify it in order that the dependants of ex-Service men may not be penalised.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I think that the right hon. Gentleman hardly expected that it would be possible for the Government to accept the Amendment, because it is clearly undesirable that, where provision has already been made for the dependants of service men at the expense of the State, you should duplicate that provision, again at the expense of the State. If it be true, as the right hon. Gentleman said, that most of the cases concerned are cases where the service pension has been calculated with reference to the necessities of the pensioner, then certainly there is no hardship so far as they are concerned, because such cases are excluded from the provisions of this Sub-section. It is not, therefore, with those that we are concerned now, but those whose pensions have not been awarded to them in consideration of their needs but in consideration of the disability or the service rendered by the deceased husband.
In the case of the second part of the proviso, it is there stated that, although the general principle is that there shall not be double pensions, yet we do not want, as the right hon. Gentlemen said, in any way to penalise these people, and we do not, therefore, permit our Clause to act in such a way that any of these people would be worse off than they
would be if they were able to get the benefits under this Bill. Therefore, if their present pensions are less than might be provided under this Bill, including the allowances to dependant children, then the difference will be made up to them. The whole finance of this has keen based on the assumption that this Clause will be passed. To alter it would probably involve us in considerable liability, for which there is no provision in the Bill, and, while I do not rest the case on that point, because I think the case stands upon its own merits, I do say in any case it would not be possible, on financial grounds, to accede to the right hon. Gentleman's proposal.

Mr. F. ROBERTS: Is it not true to say that in every case they are paying for the pension which we are now asking that they should receive in the same way that other people would receive it?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: If the right hon. Gentleman refers to the fact that there is to be a deduction from their pay, I quite sec the point. He argues that as these men are going to pay their contributions, they should have the same benefits as other people. May I say that these service men are undoubtedly exposed to special risks which are not the risks upon which the actuarial calculations were based in considering the flat rate contribution. But I would say this further, that by reason of the contributions they make under the Bill, these men would keep themselves in insurance, and, therefore, a man who had, say, spent a year in the Army and had come out of the Army, would be kept in insurance, by virtue of his contributions, for another year; so that if he were to die, his widow during the whole period would be entitled to a pension. Therefore, it is a very valuable benefit that they secure to themselves, and one which, I am informed, on the calculations of the actuaries, involves a very considerable amount more than the actual contributions.

Mr. ROBERTS: I want to make this case perfectly clear, because there are undoubtedly many hundreds of thousands of people who come under the flat rate of 5s. who will be deprived of the benefit when qualifying age is reached for coming within the scope of the present Bill. How does the right hon. Gentleman propose to meet the circumstances of this particular kind of case?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I am not quite sure I caught the point which the right hon. Gentleman put.

Mr. ROBERTS: There are many mothers of sons killed in the war at present receiving the flat rate pension of 5s. a week, and, by reason of the fact that their husbands are insured persons, would be entitled, if the husband died, to come under the provisions of this Bill. Are you to take into calculation the flat rate of 5s. the mother receives for the loss of her son?

Mr. T. THOMSON: This is a, complicated Bill, and no doubt we have not all been able to follow its details as closely as we would like, but it is astonishing to me to find that the ordinary service pension is to be regarded as a set off in relation to the pensions conferred by the Bill. That seems to be taking an unfair advantage of a large number of people and to indicate that this so-called contributory scheme, is not to be run on proper contributory lines. If you make a bargain with an insurance company you get what you have paid for, irrespective of any other insurances you may have made, and I cannot see why the Government should stand on a different footing from the insurance company. The point made by the right hon. Gentleman is a vital one, and it will influence a great many people when they find that because they have been drawing service pensions, they are to be denied the benefits of this Bill.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD: I do not desire that the very important point made by my right hon. Friend should be obscured, because it is a very good test point, but may I generalise it and put this question. Am I not right in assuming that the provisions of this Bill lie upon the ex-service man in precisely the same way as they lie upon the ordinary civilian? He has to pay his contributions and his employer has to pay contributions on his behalf. That being so, am I right, further, in assuming that the meaning of what the Minister has just said is that although his contributions are fully paid he does not get the same benefit as the civilian? I think that puts the case in a nutshell.

Major HORE-BELISHA: A Sub-section of this kind is indefensible in logic. There is no ground for bringing into con-
sideration some other source of finance which may be open to the pensioner. It is no business of the Minister if the pensioner inherits a fortune, though it may seem ridiculous to pay him 10s. per week in such circumstances. Similarly it is no business of the Minister if the contributor happens to have another pension, owing to circumstances quite extraneous to this Bill. The Minister might make this concession which seems only logical—that there should be a surrender value. If it is said that a person in receipt of a dependant's pension cannot draw a pension under this scheme, you owe it to that person to refund the contributions which you have been taking by false pretences during a number of years. I am sure it is irksome to the Minister to feel that he is being unduly generous to the relatives of those who have fallen in the Great War by making an additional contribution to that which is already made by the State, but these people are clearly, in equity if not in law, entitled to some surrender value for their contributions. The wording of this Sub-section requires explanation. It seems to confer an extraordinarily vague series of powers, and I doubt if any hon. Member reading it for the first time could understand it clearly. It gives powers to make regulations which could be very detrimental to the potential recipients of the bounties of this Bill, and I shall oppose it in every possible way.

Mr. J. BECKETT: May I ask the Committee to consider the Amendment in the impartial light in which Members on all sides of this House have continually emphasized that questions of ex-service men and dependants' pensions must be considered? Looking at it in that light, let us take the position of a man who was injured in the War, who died from his injuries since the War, and whose widow is receiving a pension, as compared with the position of the conscientious objector, who was not killed in the War, who went on working through the War, when he was not in prison, who, after the War, went on with his work, who was fortunately able to save a little money, and who, too, died and left a widow. You are penalising, in this Bill, the man who was killed in the War, for whom you profess to have admiration, in favour of the man who did not serve in that capacity. If that proposal were made from these Benches, hon. Members opposite would be the first to get up and declare that
this was the most wicked and unfair injustice to men who had served their great and glorious Empire that could possibly be imagined. The whole forces of the Conservative party would be out to expose us as a set of unpatriotic humbugs.
This Clause is not introduced by us, but by the friends of the ex-service men, who profess, more than any other party, to have a duty towards these men; and that is quite right. You sent them out to fight; we did not, and it is your duty, at least as much as it is ours, to look after them when they come home. Yet you deliberately propose to penalise the dependants of the men who served you, at a very cheap rate, in favour of people who were wise enough to stay at home in comfortable jobs. [An HON. MEMBER: "Wise enough?"] Lucky enough, if the adjective offends you but you are making it wise enough. If we brought up this proposal, there would not be this dim and ghastly silence which is hanging over all the patriotic friends of the Empire in this Committee at the present moment. There is very little anxiety on the part of hon. Members opposite to stand up for the men whom they admire against the cracks of their party whip, and the least they can do, when we are endeavouring to do our bit for the men we stand for as well as they, if perhaps the discipline of the quarter-deck would be too severe to allow them to speak, is to lend their silent support in the division Lobby to sec that justice is done to those men whom most of the hon. Members opposite distinguished themselves very greatly on the recruiting platform in the war in trying to get to go and serve.

Brigadier-General CHARTERIS: I am sure the Committee will realise that we are not likely to be moved by the taunts directed at us from the Benches opposite But I am sorry the hon. Member who spoke last had the opportunity before me, because I rise to support this Amendment. I am not aware bow much money is involved in the concession which has been asked, but I am sure that a large body of opinion on this side of the House and in the country feels that the Bill, as it stands, is in fact penalising those who took part in the Great War. Unless the financial conditions are such as to make the thing entirely imposible, I would urge the Minister to see if in some measure
he cannot meet the case which is undoubtedly very strong indeed, that the pentions granted under this Bill should not be set off against those that have been won by service for the country. As it stands, there is no reasonable doubt that many of these people will, in fact, be paying, not for something they are going to get themselves, but for something that some other person will get and that they will be deprived of. I trust the Minister will anyhow tell us what is the financial commitment involved in some concession of the nature specified in the Amendment. Unless the cost is so great that it is entirely impossible to meet it. I would urge very strongly and I think hon. Members on this side of the House equally with hon. Members opposite would urge that some concession should be made.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The actual cost of the Amendment proposed by my hon. Friend—and I have had the figures taken out by an actuary—I am sorry to say will be, from £4,000,000 to £5,000,000 a year to start off with. In reply to another hon. Member, I find that it is not correct to say that the men coming under this Clause are penalised. What happens is this: That they are already in receipt of certain benefits, or are entitled to them, from the State by virtue of their service. It is not necessary to duplicate the payments. What we have to be very careful to guard against is that we are not asking them to pay for something more than the benefits that they can claim under the scheme.

Mr. F. ROBERTS: Might I press the right hon. Gentleman for an answer to the specific test case which I submitted to him?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: The case, as I understood it, was the ease of a service dependents pension of 5s. That will be taken into account if it is not a needs pension.

Mr. D. GRENFELL: The Minister told us when the Bill was introduced that there was to be no means limit in it. Here we have a means limit imposed, which implies the worst form of discrimination that this House could impose. If a widow is left with an income of £5 or £10 from property or some other source, the pension is paid; but if a widow is left with 5s. because her boy has lost his life in the country's service,
she will not be given the full pension which her husband has earned by payment of the contributions. I think this and the following Clause, are the most disgraceful of all the Clauses in the Bill. It is a disgrace to this House. I hope that hon. Members on the other side, as well as on this side, will vote solidly against the Government, so that we may get this Clause out of the Bill.

Captain FRASER: I do not desire to enter into a long argument upon this case or the Amendment, because the case has been very clearly put. I want merely in a very few words to deny as emphatically as I can the allegation that the proposal which the Minister has made is either disgraceful or mean, or not put forward with the best possible intentions. It must be plain that there is a difficulty, and that the right hon. Gentleman is seeking to cut his coat according to his cloth. The suggestion that he is doing something from some bad motive, or that this House is doing something disgraceful, is, in my view, not worthy of this House. But I want to ask the Minister whether the action which has been taken is entirely logical, and whether he cannot possibly deal with the matter in some other way. I do not want to suggest that the Ministry of Pensions should take away the pensions it has granted, but at least that would be more logical than denying pensions for which contributions have been paid. If in fact these pensions are given because of necessity, then I suggest the Ministry of Pensions should consider, after the pension earned by the contributor has been paid, whether or not there is still necessity. If there is, the Ministry of Pensions should continue its pension, and if there is not it might consider that it was in the interests of the taxpayer— whom, we must never forget, it must serve—to take away or diminish that pension. It seems to me illogical to take away or diminish or try to square payment by making a deduction from that for which contributions have been paid; the deduction should come from the other end, if there is to be one at all.

Mr. THURTLE: I only want to press the Minister on the point which has been made by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for West Bromwich (Mr. F. Roberts) in regard to the flat rate pension. I take it the Minister is aware that there are two kinds of pensions awarded
to parents. There is the need pension, which is a kind of compassionate pension, given because the parent is in necessitous circumstances, and there is the flat rate pension, which is fixed and is given irrespective of need, and is understood to be the equivalent of what a parent might have expected for his or her lifetime had the son survived the Great War. That is clearly the income which the State believes would always have been received by that parent, and that being the case, it does seem to me—I do not want to use any harsh words, or to seem to be abusive—to be quite unreasonable and unjust to that parent that that particular income should be taken into account in deciding whether or not the woman should have the full widow's pension or old age pension. I suggest to the Minister that on that one given point at least he ought, in view of the circumstances, to make some provision whereby the flat rate pension will not be taken into account at all as income.

Mr. NEIL MACLEAN: I think, if the Minister had put this point before the consideration of his own party before he placed this Clause in the Bill, he would have been told it ought not to be included, and I am certain that if the Members of the party had the power of the Whips taken from them in voting on this point the Clause as it stands would be defeated, and there would be a demand that some better method be found for the apportionment of the pension. What is it the Minister is endeavouring to do here? In his reply to the late Minister of Pensions he has admitted that a pension which has been given by the State to a woman for the loss of her son is going to be taken into consideration when computing whether she is to receive 10s. old age pension to which the contributions of her husband entitle her. That has been described as mean. I consider it is the worst possible treatment that could be extended to these widows, to tell them that because they already have a pension of, say, 5s. or 6s. a week from the State that they are not to receive the old age pension of 10s., but are to receive the difference between 5s. or 6s. and the 10s. pension. That is to say, that this Government are actually telling those women that it is believed by the Government that they can live upon 10s. per week. I should like
to see the ladies associated with hon. Members opposite trying to live on 10s. per week, and I should like to know of any other section of the community which is being treated in that way. These are the mothers of the soldiers who fought for this country in order to defend your mothers and wives and property and now you are proposing to treat the mothers of those soldiers in this fashion. The Minister of Health says that this Amendment would cost between £4,000,000 and £5,000,000, but of course that would be a diminishing amount. If this is to be the cost of giving these women the full 10s., does that include the pension to which they are already entitled? The Committee is entitled to have an answer to that question. Are we going to let a matter of £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 stand in the way? It did not stand in the way when you wanted boys for the Army. Then, money was no object, but now, when it comes to giving these women what they are entitled to, you say "No." You say to these women: "Because you have already got 5s. per week for the loss of your boy, we are only going to give you 5s. and steal the other 5s. to which you are entitled from you." [HON. MEMBERS: "No, No"!] What is it but theft, if you take away from them something to which they are entitled? If you take 5s. out of the pocket of a woman that is theft, and if you take away 5s. to which she is entitled, that is also theft. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will be able to say that on the Report Stage he will be prepared to insert an Amendment that will safeguard the rights of these women, and give them the full pension to which they are entitled.

Major PRICE: I hope the Minister will give careful attention to some of these Amendments. What we feel is that where the dependant of a pensioner is in receipt of a pension it is because he has earned it, and upon that ground as well as upon a sense of fairness and equity, I ask the Minister to accede to the Amendment in some form or other so that those who are entitled to a pension shall receive it. The right hon. Gentleman said that about £4,000,000 per annum would be the amount required in respect of this concession. It is difficult to understand that because under Clause 11 the total amount to
be contributed by the State is £4,000,000 per year. I do not know whether we can have some further explanation, but seeing that whatever concession is made in this case will be a diminishing factor, I think the right hon. Gentleman should grant this concession. I am ready to support anything which will help the ex-service man in this respect.

Mr. HARNEY: I am a little puzzled as to this Clause and the Amendment. I certainly do not impute anything at all unworthy or mean to the Minister, but all through the Debates on this Bill we have constantly had put before us that this is an Insurance Bill, and that the Minister has been obliged to harden his heart on many occasions because he could not actuarially fit suggestions into an insurance scheme. It is from that point of view that I see the strength of the arguments for this Amendment. The Bill says that there are certain persons who are now entitled to pensions calculated with reference to the necessities of the pensioner. Who are these people? They are persons who did not contribute money for their pensions, but contributed a limb, or broken health, or a crippled life. That is a contribution for which the benefit is a pension to the degree of their necessities. What is their position to-day? As soon as this Bill is passed, these men will be asked to contribute something. Are they to get nothing for that something? If we never had this Bill, they would have their pensions in full, as the due reward for the services they rendered. This Bill says, "Thou shalt pay weekly a certain sum." Are they to get nothing for that? The Clause says that the Minister may make regulations with a view to excluding these persons from that to which they would have been entitled had this Bill never been passed. Why should he have such a power? On what ground of insurance principle or of equity ought persons to be deprived of the benefit that flows from a contribution actuarially fixed, because in fact at the time they are receiving a pension as the result of other contributions—of a limb or of health—that they have made? To my mind it is a perfectly indefensible Clause, and I certainly shall support the Amendment. I do not at all appreciate what the right hon. Gentleman says when he states that it will cost £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 to do this. If it did cost £4,000,000 or £5,000,000, it should
be done, but it cannot cost anything like that. I do not know how the calculation was made. Whether he adds the war and the civil service pensions together or not I do not know, but it certainly was the duty of the actuary, when this Bill was being framed, to see that the contributions paid were the basis upon which the benefit should be given. These men have paid the contributions, and they are entitled to the benefits none the less because at the same time they are drawing pensions for far greater, far more permanent, and far more affecting contributions which they have made in the service of the country.

Lieut.-Colonel HENDERSON: I should like to ask the Minister what exactly is the meaning of this Clause. In the first place, an expression is used in it which has never been used before in connection with pensions legislation, namely, "service dependants' pension," which the average person will not understand. As far as I can make out from the explanatory part of the Bill it means either any of the three classes of dependants' pensions or a widow's pension. If that be the case, I can quite understand that there might be some ground for saying that the class of dependants' pensions known as need pensions might be regulated in so far as this extra benefit is concerned, but it should be so that this pension, which is a contributory pension, is not touched. If anything is to be touched the Need Pension should be reduced. But although that argument might hold good, I do not see that it has anything to do with the widows' pensions, or with the fiat rate dependants pension or the dependants pension paid on the ground of the amount contributed by the son to the parents before he was killed, and if as I follow it by thin extraordinary abstruse Clause, it is going to be the case that the widow will not be entitled to a pension, and that the dependant drawing a flat rate pension of 5s. will lose her pension, and that the dependants who are drawing pensions because their son contributed to their support before he was killed, will also lose their pension. I am certainly not going to support the Clause and I shall vote for the Amendment.

Captain MACMILLAN: Certain speeches which were made making the better appear the worse nearly per-
suaded me to support the Government, but the Debate has progressed since that period and it seems to me there is a very strong case indeed for asking the Government to reconsider this Clause. I very much hope the Minister will be able to say he is prepared to reconsider the question, and to redraft the Clause. I agree entirely with the remarks of the last speaker, that there can be no justification for putting a man in a worse position, because he is an ex-service man drawing benefit in respect of that, than he otherwise would be in. I hope very much that the Minister will reconsider the position.

Mr. PIELOU: I should like to emphasise the remarks which have been made by Members of all parties. I agree that the ex-serviceman's question should not be at all a party political question. I have on different occasions, perhaps not altogether successfully, voiced the problems of ex-service men. I welcomed the news with regard to Old Age Pensions, that income was no longer to be taken into consideration. As one who has sat on an Old Age Pensions Committee, and has known the searching inquiries made by the officials of the Customs and Excise, I naturally welcome the fact that that was going to be done away with. Now, in another way, we understand that income is going to be taken into consideration. After all, surely it was truly and well earned. Can you repay in any way the loss those people have sustained as the result of the War? The Chancellor of the Exchequer said, when introducing his Budget, that the decreasing expenditure on pensions year by year would be made up in this Bill, as a memorial to those who laid down their lives for their King and their Country. Surely you ore chipping a few of the edges off that memorial when you encroach upon the pensions of the widows and the mothers. On the question of ex-service men's problems and pensions generally, I am perhaps rather inclined to be "agin" any Government, whichever it may be, but I do not think I have ever been unjust, whichever Minister it may be who has occupied that position. I am rather inclined to think that this is the thin end of the wedge in trying to reduce the pensions which were so ably earned in the sacrifices of the War. I appeal to the Minister to see whether he cannot give serious consideration to the
Amendment and to wipe out the Clause that stands in the Bill at the present moment.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I would like the Committee to consider really what we are arguing upon in this Clause. We are all a little apt, in the very natural and laudable sympathy we have with the ex-service men and their dependants, to lose sight of other considerations which ought to be taken into account. I would remind the Committee once more that it would cost £4,000,000 or £5,000,000 a year at the outset. We have not the means to provide that. I am going to suggest to hon. Members that really the proper and logical outcome of the considerations which they have put before us would have been an alteration in Clause 16; that is to say, those people should have been left out of this Bill altogether. That was the original frame and scheme of the Bill. It was not intended to bring service men into the Bill. It was a Bill for civilians and for the conditions of civilians; but it was put forward by the service authorities that they desired to have the service men brought into the Bill, and for that reason Clause 16 was put in providing that reduction should be made from their Pay.

Mr. ROBERTS: This Clause deals with dependants of ex-service men and not service men.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN: I know, but under the Bill these dependants would be entitled to pensions by virtue of their insurance. Supposing that you have a man who has been in the Army and has been in insurable employment and paying his contributions, when he comes out of the Army he may fall out of insurance, unless he enters an insurable employment. But by reason of the fact that he has kept up his contributions, 4½d. a week, he is considered to have been in insurable employment while he has been in the Army. If he dies, his widow and family would be entitled to the full benefits of the Bill. A. man who enters the insurance at the age of 25 would have to pay 1s. 4½d., according to the actuarial arrangement. [HON. MEMBERS: "Reply to the Amendment!"] It is really worth the while of the service men to pay the contributions which are-provided by Clause 16, because the benefits which they stand to gain are indeed worth far more to them than the contri-
butions they would have to pay. I ask the Committee to support us in resisting the Amendment.

Sir ROBERT HAMILTON: There is one short point. As I understand the position at the present moment, a woman who is in receipt of 5s. a week in respect of the loss of her son in the War and qualified for the old age pension at 70, supposing she is within the means limit—I understand there is no deduction made in respect of the 5s. she receives for the loss of her son. Under the proposed scheme you are going to introduce a different manner of treatment. Are you going to alter the system under which a person draws an old age pension, and 5s. in respect of her son, or is she to be allowed to draw both pensions?

Mr. ARTHUR GREENWOOD: I hope that, even now, the right hon. Gentleman will attempt to reconsider this question, because there is a very large unanimity in the Committee on this point. His last intervention did not deal with the difficulty. Double pensions ought to be avoided. It was the pride of the Minister, and quite rightly, that he was doing a good deal to abolish the means test qualification. The question we are dealing with now falls under that head. If one assumes that the man in respect of whom dependants' pensions are being paid had lived, these people would still have been receiving that assistance. That would not have been called into account by the right hon. Gentleman. That pension would still have been received, but because through the misfortune of war these men have died, the position or their dependants is worse, because they are to be deprived of the amount that they would have received from the dead soldier.
It is not really a question of double pension, but a question of the abolition of the means limit, and I cannot think that the House of Commons, if the Minister would give his approval, would for one moment stand in the way of finding the necessary £4,000,000 or £5,000,000. I am convinced that there is not one hon. Member who would not be willing to agree to an extra penny on the Income Tax for that purpose. If the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider the question he will meet the desires of a very large number of people in all quarters of the House. It has been suggested that this question should be raised above the level
of party politics. We all agree that there is an opportunity now for a national act on the part of all political parties, to see that nothing in this Bill shall in any way worsen the position of people who have suffered by the War. I appeal to the right hon. Gentleman with all the earnestness I can command to give us what we are asking for, an undertaking that on the Report stage he will try to deal with this matter in accordance with the wishes of the whole Committee.

Mr. WILLIAM GREENWOOD: May I suggest that the Government should leave this question to the free judgment of the Committee? Whether they do so or not, if the matter goes to a Division, I shall vote for the Amendment.

Brigadier-General CHARTERIS: I would ask the Minister, if he cannot accept the Amendment as it stands—I suppose that the figure which he has given makes it impossible that the Amendment as it stands could be accepted—to give us an undertaking that between now and the Report stage he will consider some form of concession involving less money, and particularly that the case of dependent children and the case of the disabled ex-service man should be, considered.

Sir JOHN PENNEFATHER: I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will give an undertaking to consider the matter between now and the Report stage. A great

many of us are much perturbed by what has happened.

12 M.

Mr. B. PETO: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman see any way of separating service pensions from dependants' pensions. The arguments put before the Committee as to the dependants' pensions, which is really a, question of the means limit and nothing else, are unanswerable. Therefore I do hope that the Minister will not put those of us who are his supporters in the unfortunate position of having either to vote against the Government on this Amendment or else vote against what we regard as the whole principle of the Bill. When we consider this particular sub-section we see that its very wording involves ambiguity. I beg the right hon. Gentleman to postpone the sub-section, and reconsider the matter and bring it up again on the Report stage.

Captain BENN: May I point out that voting for this Amendment does not commit us to the £4,000,000, mentioned by the Minister. The first preliminary to any amending scheme, must be to leave out these words. It is then open to the Minister to introduce any other scheme he likes.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out to the word 'may,' in line 15, stand part of the Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 181; Noes, 136.

Division No. 281.]
AYES.
[12.6 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Fermoy, Lord


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fielden, E. B.


Albery, Irving James
Chamborlain, Rt. Hon. N.(Lady wood)
Fleming, D. P.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Chapman, Sir S.
Ford. P. J.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Chilcott, Sir Warden
Forestier-Walker, Sir L.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Christie. J. A.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Clarry, Reginald George
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Ganzoni, Sir John


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.
Gates, Percy


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Cope, Major William
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Bethell, A.
Couper, J. B.
Goff, Sir Park


Bird. E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Courthope, Lieut.-Cot. George L.
Grace, John


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend)
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Gretton, Colonel John


Bowater, sir T. Vansittart
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Grotrlan, H. Brent


Brass, Captain W.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Briscoe, Richard George
Dalkeith, Earl of
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Davidson, J. (Hertl'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset, Yeovil)
Halt, vice-Admiral Sir R.(Eastbourne)


Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd, Hexham)
Dawson, Sir Philip
Harland, A.


Bullock, Captain M.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Harrison, G. J. C.


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Burman, J. B.
Drewe, C.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)


Butt, Sir Alfred
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Campbell, E. T.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.


Cassels, J. D.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth, S.)
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Holt Captain H. P.
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Homan, C. W. J.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Smith. R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Murchison, C. K.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Smithers, Waldron


Hudson, Capt. A. U.M.(Hackney, N.)
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Spender Clay, Colonel H.


Hudson, R. S. (Cumb'l'nd, Whiteh'n)
Nuttall, Ellis
Stanley. Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Hume, Sir G. H.
Oakley, T.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
O'Connor, T. J. (Bedford, Luton)
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Storry Deans, R.


Jacob, A. E.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Jephcott, A. R.
Penny, Frederick George
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


King Captain Henry Douglas
Perring, William George
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Ward. Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Little Dr. E. Graham
Preston, William
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Raine, W.
Watts, Dr. T.


Looker, Herbert William
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk, Peel
Wells, S. R.


Lougher, L.
Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Wheler, Major Granville C. H.


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Lumley, L. R.
Remer, J. R.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Rentoul, G. S.
Wilson, Sir C. H (Leeds Central)


McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Rice, Sir Frederick
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


McLean Major A.
Ropner, Major L.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Rye, F. G.
Wolmer, Viscount


Makins, Brigadler-General E.
Salmon, Major I.
Womersley, W. J.


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Margesson, Captain D.
Sanderson, Sir Frank
Wragg, Herbert


Meyer, Sir Frank
Sandon, Lord



Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Savery, S. S.
Colonel Gibbs and Major Sir


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wills. Westb'y)
Harry Barnston.


Moore, Sir Newton J.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife West)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Ritson, J.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Robert, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Harney, E. A.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)



Hartington, Marquess of
Robinson, Sir T. (Lanes., Stretford)


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Robinson W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Rose, Frank H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hayday, Arthur
Saklatvala, Shapurji


Barnes, A.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Barr, J.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scrymgeour, E.


Batey, Joseph




Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Scurr, John


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, G. H.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton. W.)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Bowyer, Capt. G. E. W.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Shiels, Dr. Drummond



Horlick, Lieut.-Colonel J. N.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's Univ., Belfast)


Broad. F. A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sitch, Charles H.


Bromley, J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Snell, Harry


Buchanan, G.
John, William (Rhonda, West)
Snowden, Rt. Hon, Philip


Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stamford, T. W.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Stephen, Campbell


Clowes, S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Colfox, Major Wm. Philips
Kelly, W. T.
Taylor, R. A.


Compton, Joseph
Kennedy, T.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kirkwood, D.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Lawson, John James
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, F.
Thurtle, E.


Davidson, Major-General Sir J.H.
Lindley, F. W.
Tinker, John Joseph


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lunn, William
Viant, S. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Duncan, C.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Dunnico, H.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Westwood, J.


England, Colonel A.
March, S.
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Maxton, James
Whiteley, W.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Wiggins. William Martin


Fenby, T. D.
Morris, R. H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Finburgh, S.
Naylor, T. E.
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)


Forrest, W.
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Gibbins, Joseph
Owen, Major G.
Williams. T. (York, Don Valley)


Gillett, George M.
Paling, W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Gosling, Harry
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Greenall, T.
Peto, Basil E. (Devon Barnstaple)
Windsor, Walter


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Pielou, D. P.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Ponsonby, Arthur



Grenfell, D. B. (Glamorgan)

Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Groves, T.
Potts, John S.



Grundy, T. W.
Price, Major C. W. M.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Warne.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil
Riley, Ben

Amendments made: In page 23, line 14, at the end, insert the words
Provided that the right to a pension under thi6 Act shall not affect any right to, or to the continuance of, a pension payable under the Old Age Pensions Acts, 1908 to 1024, as applied to blind persons by The Blind Persons Act, 1920.

In page 23, line 17, leave out Subsection (6).—[Sir K. Wood.]

Motion made, and Question put, "That the Clause, as amended, stand part of the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 195; Noes, 97.

Division No. 282.]
AYES.
[12.17 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Finburgh, S.
Nuttall, Ellis


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Fleming, D. P.
Oakley, T.


Albery, Irving James
Ford, P. J.
O'Connor, T. J, (Bedford, Luton)


Alexander, E. E. (Leyton)
Forestler-Walker, L.
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Foster, Sir Harry S.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Penny, Frederick George


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M.S.
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Perrlng, William George


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Goff, Sir Park
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Grace, John
Pleiou, D. P.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Preston, William


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Greenwood, William (Stockport)
Raine, W.


Bethell, A.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rawson, Alfred Cooper


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Blundell, F. N.
Hall, Vice-Admiral Sir R.(Eastbourne)
Remer, J. R.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Rentoul, G. S.


Bowater, Sir T. Vansittart
Harland, A.
Rice, Sir Frederick


Brass, Captain W.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Briggs, J. Harold
Hartington, Marquess of
Ropner, Major L.


Briscoe, Richard George
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Rye, F. G.


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Salmon, Major I.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Brown, Maj. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Sanderson, Sir Frank


Bullock, Captain M.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Sandon, Lord


Burgoyne, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Alan
Holt. Capt. H. P.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Burman, J. B.
Homan, C. W. J.
Savery, S. S.


Butt, Sir Alfred
Hope. Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Shaw, Capt. w. W. (Wills, Westb'y)


Campbell, E. T.
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Sheffield, Sir Berkeley


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hudson. Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Skelton, A. N.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Hudson, R. S. (Cumb'l'nd, Whiteh'n)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine C.)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Jacob, A. E.
Smithers, Waldron


Chapman, Sir S.
Jephcott, A. R.
Spender Clay, Colonel H.


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Christie, J. A.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Steel, Major Samuel Strang


Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.
Loder, J. de V.
Storry Deans, R.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Looker, Herbert William
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Cope, Major William
Lougher, L.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Couper, J. B.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Lumley. L. R.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Derltend)
MacAndrew, Charles Glen
Wallace, Captain D. E.


Crookshank, Col. C. de W. (Berwick)
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Watts, Dr. T.


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
McLean, Major A.
Wells, S. R.


Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Macmillan, Captain H.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Davidson, J. (Hertf'd, Hemel Hempst'd)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Davidson, Major-General Sir J. H.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Dawson, Sir Philip
Margesson, Captain D.
Winby, Colonel L. P.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Merriman, F. B.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Meyer, Sir Frank
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Drewe, C.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Mitchell, W. Foot (Saffron Walden)
Wolmer, Viscount


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Womersley, W, J.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Fairfax, Captain J. G.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut. Col. J. T. C.
Wragg, Herbert


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Morden, Col. W. Grant



Fermoy, Lord
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Fielden, E. B.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Colonel Gibbs and Major Sir



Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Harry Barnston.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Barr, J.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Barnes, A.
Batey, Joseph


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Roberts, Rt. Hon. F. O. (W. Bromwich)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Hirst, G. H.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Broad, F. A.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Rose, Frank H.


Buchanan, G.
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Saklatvala, Shapurji


Charleton, H. C.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Clowes, S.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Compton, Joseph
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Sitch, Charles H.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Dalton, Hugh
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Taylor, R. A.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kelly, W. T.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton. E.)


Day, Colonel Harry
Kennedy, T.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Dunnico, H.
Kirkwood, D.
Thurtle, E.


England, Colonel A.
Lawson, John James
Tinker, John Joseph


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Lee, F.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Fenby, T. D.
Lindley, F. W.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Forrest, W.
Lunn, William
Westwood, J.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Whiteley, W.


Gosling, Harry
Maclean, Nail (Glasgow, Govan)
Wiggins, William Martin


Greenall, T.
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Groves, T.
Naylor, T. E.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Guest, J. (York, Hermsworth)
Owen, Major G.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Potts, John S.



Hardle, George D.
Rees, Sir Beddoe
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Harney, E. A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Riley, Ben
Warne.


Hayday, Arthur
Ritson, J.



Bill read the Third time, and passed, with Amendments.

Ordered, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."—[Mr. N. Chamberlain.]

Committee report Progress: to sit again To-morrow.

ADVERTISEMENTS REGULATION BILL [Lords].

As amended (in the Standing Committee), considered.

CLAUSE 1.—(Extended powers of making byelaws.)

Amendment made: In page 2, line 4, leave out the words "elsewhere than in a rural district," and insert instead thereof the words
except within the district of a rural district council."—[Captain Bowyer.]

CLAUSE 2.—(Delegation of powers by county councils to district councils.)

Amendments made: In page 2, line 16, at the end, insert the words
and where any such arrangement is made the county council may delegate its powers accordingly.

In page 2, line 22, leave out the word "that", and insert instead thereof the words "the county."

In page 2, line 41, leave out the words "except with the consent of," and insert instead thereof the words
unless it is so resolved by.

In page 2, line 42, at the end, insert the words
(b) any expenses properly incurred by a district council in pursuance of the arrangement shall, so far as they are not repaid by the county council, be defrayed as part of the general expenses of the district council; and."—[Captain Bowyer.]

CLAUSE 3.—(Short title, construction and extent.)

Amendment made: In page 3, line 15, leave out from the word "Scotland," to the end of the Sub-section, and insert instead thereof the words
references to the district of a rural district council shall he construed as references to a county exclusive of any burgh situated therein."—[Captain Bowyer.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

It being after half-past Eleven of the clock upon Tuesday evening, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Half after Twelve o'Clock.